Members tlbonehead Posted August 28, 2012 Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 Way too many posts in this thread have been about "but the band isn't very good". It's irrelevant, except to the degree it helps make the point. The thread is about adding other things on top of your music WHATEVER THE QUALITY LEVEL OF THE MUSIC MIGHT BE in order to increase the bottom line."Bottom line" has vastly different definitions too depending on the act and their desired destination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 28, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 "Bottom line" has vastly different definitions too depending on the act and their desired destination. Absolutely. Which comes back to "take what might apply to you, use what you can, disregard the rest". After that, all's good. What I push back against is this attitude of those who not only find the need to declare "that doesn't apply to me" when it's kind of obvious it wasn't directed towards them in the first place, but then need to follow it up with an "I'm better than that" attitude as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BlueStrat Posted August 28, 2012 Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 Seriously, I'm really, really sorry if discussing making money with your music offends so many people. That's hardly the part that offends people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 28, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 That's hardly the part that offends people. Yet, it is. That's really all it is, at the end of the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SeniorBlues Posted August 28, 2012 Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 No, David, it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 28, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 No, David, it isn't. Yet, it is. Because the final answer from those who are offended is almost always "I don't care about the money". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SandyCo Posted August 28, 2012 Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 As an outsider (non-musician), I'm a bit puzzled why this thread took the turn that it did. It seems to me that David was only trying to present an idea, to be taken or left as desired. There is merit to adding something visual or eye-catching, because it makes the band stand out. How many gigs does a band play that are one-time events, in which the band either grabs the audience's attention or doesn't? Like it or not, the music doesn't always stand on its own - at least not with the general populace. Many people need a hook. "Oh, those are those guys who dress in suits" or "Those are the ones who dress up like the 70s", etc. Doing simple things can make a huge impact. My first thought when viewing that video was: "They're pretty good!", not "Euww, look at those useless dancers" or anything else. Would I have thought the same way if they were all wearing jeans and T-shirts? Sure, but I doubt my attention would have been caught the same way. Selling a product is not always a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Piano Whore Posted August 28, 2012 Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 Say you have 4 bar band players of average ability, that are realistic enough to accept that they aren't all that talented, who realize that even significant time and effort invested would only result in incremental, barely noticeable, not-worth-it improvement individually and as a group. Because, after a certain age, you are what you are and it is what it is. Why not, then, hire a couple skimpily-dressed hottie chicks, if it would mean $150-$200 more per piece, per gig? It's a pretty trite, hackneyed idea IMO but worth a try. That kind of thing made the rounds around area casinos some time ago but it didn't seem to catch on. Guess we got culture or something.. Speaking of the trite, hackneyed cheeZ dept..: My band does a segment where 3 members put on long fake beards to do the song from "Brother, Where Art Thou", accompanied by acoustic, with banjo solos played on a keyboard. So I can't point fingers RE cheeZ. At least we are lucky enough to have a young, hottie TALENTED chick singer who is joined on stage at times by her equally hottie, equally talented sister. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 3shiftgtr Posted August 28, 2012 Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 Seriously, I'm really, really sorry if discussing making money with your music offends so many people. But it's something some of us like to discuss and I really know of nowhere else to do it. Do you? You asked what you would or wouldn't do for money. The money concept is why the thread goes in circles. Folks do 'schtick' for so many reasons and asking what one would do FOR MONEY is a whole lot different then discussing making money making music. You are asking, by proxy, how low are you willing to go. That's what the question feels like. But we all know that great showmanship is an art in and of itself. So you are trying to get a discussion going about showmanship, and you imply some kind of ethical floor, and and where is it for you. Some folks do the 'stuff' to be popular and desire the adulation. Some do it cuz they realize they can't do it with their music but still want the adulation. Some do it purely for the money that the popularity will bring and music is how they make bank. Some do it cuz they care about the music so much, that they want to dress it up to draw attention to it. Some do it cuz they have really high RPM's and have gotten lots of attention by being boisterous so they do it onstage and it pays (bonus). Some were inspired by some theatrical element of a show and they are merely being influenced by it. The motivation for for focusing on showmanship is really far and wide. And it isn't gonna be discussed well when you position it like "what are you willing to do for money". It's a different question. The thread is about adding other things on top of your music WHATEVER THE QUALITY LEVEL OF THE MUSIC MIGHT BE in order to increase the bottom line. Then that is what you should have asked. The reason everybody here is all defensive is cuz you didn't ask that question. YOu asked another one and didn't like the answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members nobodyknows Posted August 28, 2012 Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 The question is "What would or wouldn't you do for the money?" Well - I sure as hell wouldn't have those two skanks on my stage if that's all they can do... And I'd be ashamed if I had to stoop that low just to get some bucks....that'd be the time to hang it up.... I think that's the part that offends most people David - the stooping that is - lol - I could be wrong tho.... If they could sing and maybe play something that wouldn't be so bad - as a one-off - but to just have them like in that vid as a regular feature - no - we're not pimps and that was all just too sleazy.. I'm not into selling sleaze just to improve my "bottom line" - got more respect for the music than to denigrate it like that.... I could see pimping their asses out after the show tho.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tlbonehead Posted August 28, 2012 Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 That's hardly the part that offends people.exactly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SeniorBlues Posted August 28, 2012 Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 Yet, it is. Because the final answer from those who are offended is almost always "I don't care about the money". I'm not offended by money. I'm offended by how you've been twisting the debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members caeman Posted August 28, 2012 Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 I wouldn't play slash/speed metal. I listen to a lot of different music genres and could see myself sitting in on bass, drums, fiddle, etc, but not slash/speed metal. That stuff that is really fast, loud, the whole wall of sound. It's just not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted August 28, 2012 Moderators Share Posted August 28, 2012 Of course.Where I find a disconnect is there seems to be this attitude that "if you're not up to the level of Alice Cooper musically, then you have no business adding bells and whistles to your show." But then why do bands who still aren't up to that level musically, but don't add the glitz get off the hook? Is it somehow OK to be mediocre or suck as long as you keep it "all about the music"??If anything, that all seems backwards to me. Sure, maybe this band isn't offering much to listen to but at least they're giving me some T&A to look at. Beats not-much-to-listen-to and NO T&A in my book.And is this band great? No. Are they even good? Probably not. But they are still probably better than at least half the bands in the country playing the same music and going after the same market. So if they shouldn't be adding glitz, who should? And what about all the bands worse than them? Should we just ask them to kindly not perform live, period? Please don't quote me when you're talking to other people. It's confusing as hell. Look... whatever. I've agreed with your basic point from the start. You seem to have a problem with that. I don't get it. You are the one saying to me that their execution of the idea is lacking, but the idea's is good. Paraphrasing you: If U2 did that idea it'd rock. I'm saying it wouldn't. THE IDEA IS WEAK. I am the one saying the idea itself is lacking. But your basic premise is valid. to... Try something. I agree. I am not saying a band shouldn't do it if they aren't very good musically. I did point out however that I thought the band was weak. And the combination of their very very tired musical perspective, combined with a very very thin gimmick... sucks. I am not saying others shouldn't try their hand at it. I'm only pointing out that these guys didn't really pull it off. That does not contradict your basic premise. If anything, it is adding to it. Take David's basic point and really run with it. Good lord. This is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members StratGuy22 Posted August 28, 2012 Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 We just bring a quality show to the table. Lights, cameras, action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 28, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 You are asking, by proxy, how low are you willing to go. That's what the question feels like. And that was the question. And I have zero issue with those who answered "not THAT low!" Where it goes off the rails is when the entire concept of doing extra things for money gets challenged. Then that is what you should have asked. It was clearly addressed at the outset of the thread and many, many, MANY times thereafter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 28, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 I agree. I am not saying a band shouldn't do it if they aren't very good musically. I did point out however that I thought the band was weak. And the combination of their very very tired musical perspective, combined with a very very thin gimmick... sucks. I know. You've made that point over and over. But it only serves to derail the point I was making that you claim to agree with me about. How good they are or are not is irrelevant. In fact, it helps to make my point if they aren't very good. If they were absolutely knocking it out of the park musically, they might not need to add extra snazz in order to elevate their profile. But they are not. And, frankly, neither are the vast majority of bands. Good lord. This is stupid. Yes, it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 28, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 I'm not offended by money. I'm offended by how you've been twisting the debate. I started the thread. I'm trying to keep it somewhat on topic. But I'm the one twisting the debate. Hookay.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BlueStrat Posted August 28, 2012 Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 Yet, it is. Because the final answer from those who are offended is almost always "I don't care about the money". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted August 28, 2012 Moderators Share Posted August 28, 2012 I know. You've made that point over and over. But it only serves to derail the point I was making that you claim to agree with me about. How good they are or are not is irrelevant. In fact, it helps to make my point if they aren't very good. If they were absolutely knocking it out of the park musically, they might not need to add extra snazz in order to elevate their profile. But they are not.And, frankly, neither are the vast majority of bands. I'm GLAD it makes your point. That is a good thing. I am not arguing with you!!!!!! You don't want my opinion? You don't want my slant? OK... I retract it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators BATCAT Posted August 28, 2012 Moderators Share Posted August 28, 2012 I'm going to start posting chinchillas. When I get to ten chinchillas, I will close this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 28, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 I'm GLAD it makes your point. That is a good thing. I am not arguing with you!!!!!! You don't want my opinion? You don't want my slant? OK... I retract it all. I want your opinion and slant, of course. But I'd prefer it stay on topic if at all possible. The question was "what would you do or not do for money?" You won't do THAT? Fine. What WOULD you do? Nothing at all? That's fine too. Something better? Great, let's hear about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Yer Blues Posted August 28, 2012 Members Share Posted August 28, 2012 I started the thread. I'm trying to keep it somewhat on topic. But I'm the one twisting the debate. Hookay.... He wasn't using "you" literally here. If you are happy with your posts and the results you are getting from your posts then it doesn't apply to you or your posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted August 28, 2012 Moderators Share Posted August 28, 2012 I want your opinion and slant, of course. But I'd prefer it stay on topic if at all possible. The question was "what would you do or not do for money?" You won't do THAT? Fine. What WOULD you do? Nothing at all? That's fine too. Something better? Great, let's hear about it. I am on topic. Your topic also includes, per YOU, how to up your band's $$$. And draw. And show. Don't facepalm dude. Try to take opinions that don't mesh with your's with a grain of salt if you have to. I'm sorry if my saying that band wasn't that great somehow didn't jibe with your vision of this thread. I was making a valid point. One that ironically doesn't contradict yours. You are seriously making me want to steer clear of this part of the forum with your micromanaging. Haven't you heard this all before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators BATCAT Posted August 28, 2012 Moderators Share Posted August 28, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.