Members Vito Corleone Posted August 24, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 As you said... it took years for us to build NUTS...just the same as for them (it wasn't overnight success), and we worked hard... and if you don't put time and effort into anything it's not sustainable. Sure their gimmick may be fresh the first set or the first 2-3 times you see them? But can they entertain and sustain the 'illusion' of the gimmick enough to make some real money beyond the quick cash. How many fresh faces can you play to and what is the return? That's essentially my point. Everyone wants quick results or a magic button. How many bands have I witnessed with a half assed approach to a gimmick? Dozens.... how many of the same bands have lasted beyond 2-3 years. None... They start with a bang, hit all the major clubs/events/corp opportunities... and the gimmick tires and the bookings decline... or you have to travel. The bands that were fully committed put in the time and the effort to make the model work succeed. They are at the top of the food chain. And the upstarts... well they just become a bunch of imitators. Do you want to be an innovator or an imitator? Who is more sustainable in the long run? Everything you say is true, of course. There are no short cuts. You still have to work it. But one thing stands out in this above paragraph: you almost make it sound as if the gimmick with these half-assed bands is the reason they didn't last. No, they didn't last because they were half-assed. They were half-assed before they adopted a gimmick and still were after. Nothing is going to make a half-assed band full-assed. But a good band that doesn't do SOMETHING is often going to remain on the bottom. And for a good band, a gimmick may very well be the thing that catapults them into something bigger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 24, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 A point I wanted to add... in the case of the band presented... sure could I see a band improving their business outlook by staying classic rock and spicing up the show. Maybe they could have the lead singer dress like Tarzan and have a couple Jane's on stage. I have no problems with schtick... and I LOVE classic rock... I grew up with it. But you are still going to have to embrace the pop classics of the era and beyond in order to grab the wider audiences attention. A bunch of middle aged guys on stage playing Foghat with some Go Go dancers on stage will appeal to those over 40. Under 40 it could be interpreted as a 'creepy' dad moment. It's a fine line. I'm not offended in the least in what this band is doing. Good for them. Again in Cali it may work for them. In NY aside from privates and some bike rallies I don't see it playing in the clubs at all. Bars might pick it up... but playing the bars isn't not moving the needle far on pay and exposure. And again, I'm not really talking about what these guys are doing specifically. I'm not encouraging anyone do THAT. What works for them won't work for somebody else in a different market. My band couldn't do that: we're too old. We'd look silly. Those guys are young enough where they can still pull it off. And any younger and they'd look silly in those getups as well. And the girls are the right age as well: young enough to still be sexy; not so young that it makes the guys look creepy. Every band has to find the right thing that works for them. I'm just trying to find ways to get more people to think outside the box. Just getting up on stage and playing some classic rock? Those guys are a pretty good band. The singer is pretty good. Their songlist is tried and true. Probably better than most bands to be honest. But without the gimmick they'd be making $400. Now they have good gigs with a full schedule. And have been at it for a few years now. Yeah, some people can go the route your band has gone. Some can go the route my band has gone. Some can't feasibly do either of our paths. This is one other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Leftcoast123 Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 A bunch of middle aged guys on stage playing Foghat with some Go Go dancers on stage will appeal to those over 40. Under 40 it could be interpreted as a 'creepy' dad moment. It's a fine line.Grant, you've made a good point here but it should have some discussion and maybe that's a whole new thread. At what point is the presentation beyond the "that's rock" and into "OMG that's lame"? Foghat? Yeah...no. And I'm only pointing out that the age of the performers is something that some perceive as having bearing on the format and obviously the venue choices. Do I agree? Absolutely...unless it's me! Really, when do we call the bluff that 40 is the new 30? When we're 55? Time for a drink and forget that shi*! Another angle I detect is while music is perhaps continent wide, as an extreme generalization, business, as to what works in each market, is certainly regional if not local. BTW, the gimmick that we all point out with The Department of Rock....is it a gimmick to the audience and by that to those that have come and maybe enjoyed what they've heard and seen at other gigs beyond an all-ages "town square" type show? Or is it just the musicians, like us, that we think are tossing this execution as a lame eye candy way of scoring a gig? I bet we'd all have a different take on this if the two dancers were pulling off great backing vocals in addition to the sultry moves.The dancers on stage don't detract from the playing. Maybe distract but it doesn't remove the musicianship and it wouldn't for me or those I'd have on stage with me. It would likely complicate the business side though with logistics, pay and the like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members StratGuy22 Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 We just go and do an honest days rocking for an honest days pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SpaceNorman Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 I'm IN ... I've done sillier {censored} for alot less. Come to think of it, I've done some downright stoopid {censored} for free! Now while that's my answer to the hypothetical question posed in the original post - it's certainly not a direction I have any intention of going in. It's not that I have any issues with dancing hotties ... it's just that my experience with hotties is that they come with way too much drama for my tastes. At 56 ... I can't help but feel that trying to surround myself with dancing hotties would have such an air of desperation about it that it's just something can't see myself pursuing. The reality is I'm at that stage in life where I'm starting to hate kids. I don't mind playing for 'em ... but having them bounce around on my stage? {censored} that ... get off my lawn!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tim_7string Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 But what's so 'drastic'? Remember, the proposition is that you get to keep playing the same songs you do now. So if you're doing it for the music---that's pretty much off the table. The songs remain the same. I saw a band that had the gimmick of a stripper that came up for one song. They were a pretty good band, but a big part of their draw was all because guys were waiting to see the stripper. The nights that she had off, they apparently played to almost nobody. Once that foreign element has been introduced, that new thing becomes the reason why your band is popular. I suppose if the music and stage presence is otherwise lacking, then it makes sense. But I'd rather have my band be the way it is and our audience grows and/or changes with it than put something else there to prop it up. Also, how many guys here are virtually completely unwilling to play anything but classic rock. Fine, but classic rock these days is a direct route to a lifetime of $400 a night gigs in really {censored}ty bars. Unless one is willing to look outside the typical marketing box... Regarding this: we don't play classic rock only, so it doesn't apply to me at all. I'm personally trying to get away from some of the more generic classic rock tunes. We currently have a good chunk of it, but there are other bands that play a lot more. Am I going to switch completely over to play Top 40 pop with shrill, squeaky female vocals? Absolutely not. But we don't just play for $400 in {censored}ty bars. And the reasons why we do are several, none of which happens to be because it's the only gigs we can get. Not at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rog951 Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 I wouldn't really want to add dancers to the scheme if that's all they did. If they sung or played an instrument a little and were more a "true part of the band" then I might consider it. Lord knows we could be a lot more interesting. I've often thought about firing our bass player and replacing him with a hot chick bass player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 24, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 Once that foreign element has been introduced, that new thing becomes the reason why your band is popular. That's one way to look at it. The other way is it is bringing more people in to hear your music and increase your exposure. It's like putting a nice sign in front of your shop, or having a killer special that brings people in. Like you said, that other band was pretty good but without the stripper nobody showed up. Doesn't do you much good to be a pretty good band if nobody shows up to find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 24, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 I've often thought about firing our bass player and replacing him with a hot chick bass player. Haven't we all?(Well, except for flanc who already has one.....) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MusicalSchizo Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 I'm fine with it. I wouldn't mind looking that those gals all night...and they could interact with the audience. And I love the way they're dressed. Anyone else notice that they messed up the arrangement on "I Want You To Want Me"? Not a bad band, though. Brian V. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 24, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 Regarding this: we don't play classic rock only, so it doesn't apply to me at all. I'm personally trying to get away from some of the more generic classic rock tunes. We currently have a good chunk of it, but there are other bands that play a lot more. Am I going to switch completely over to play Top 40 pop with shrill, squeaky female vocals? Absolutely not. But we don't just play for $400 in {censored}ty bars. And the reasons why we do are several, none of which happens to be because it's the only gigs we can get. Not at all. OK. If it doesn't apply to you, then it doesn't apply to you. I have no way to know really. I'm just saying that the writing on the classic rock wall is pretty clear: that genre is dying. Fast. outside of bands with gimmicks or something else really, really remarkable about their performance, the gigs for classic rock bands are drying up and the pay is decreasing. This band I highlighted, for good, bad or otherwise, has found a way to continue playing classic rock and play good gigs for good money in a market where every other band classic rock has either moved on to modern pop/Top 40, modern country, or faded into oblivion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tim_7string Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 That's one way to look at it. The other way is it is bringing more people in to hear your music and increase your exposure. It's like putting a nice sign in front of your shop, or having a killer special that brings people in. Like you said, that other band was pretty good but without the stripper nobody showed up. Doesn't do you much good to be a pretty good band if nobody shows up to find out. I have a specific vision of how I want my band to be and where I factor into it. It doesn't include window dressing in order to get more money. I have guys in the band that feel the same way. I'm fine with where that approach takes us into the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wheresgrant3 Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 And again, I'm not really talking about what these guys are doing specifically. I'm not encouraging anyone do THAT. What works for them won't work for somebody else in a different market. My band couldn't do that: we're too old. We'd look silly. Those guys are young enough where they can still pull it off. And any younger and they'd look silly in those getups as well. And the girls are the right age as well: young enough to still be sexy; not so young that it makes the guys look creepy.Every band has to find the right thing that works for them. I'm just trying to find ways to get more people to think outside the box. Just getting up on stage and playing some classic rock? Those guys are a pretty good band. The singer is pretty good. Their songlist is tried and true. Probably better than most bands to be honest. But without the gimmick they'd be making $400. Now they have good gigs with a full schedule. And have been at it for a few years now. Ahhhh but that's the crux isn't it. The window of time. What happens in 3 years of 5 years. Do they become too old to pull it off? Then what happens to the gimmick and the act? Do they find something new to base a theme on. Again I'm not against using themes or gimmicks at all, but when they are used (if you intend to keep on using them) they should be timeless. Anything that incorporates a sexy image will have an expiration date. Notice the two insanely successful bands I mentioned (both which play a decent amount of classic rock in their setlists) neither have a sexy female nor are they selling sex at all as an marketing point. The guys in The Nerds are in their late 40's to mid 50's. The Amish Outlaws are 30-50. Both bands could rock under their guise until their 60's. It goes hand in hand with the other thread I started about bands putting a PYT upfront and the band ages behind them. The girl is cute, she can't really front but she's enthusatic and diverts attention from the creepy bass player (no offense to bass players). But what happens in 3-5 years. What if she gets pregnant or gains weight? They put her upfront to maintain an image while the band behind her does the heavy lifting. If a band has to replace it's PYT every 4 years will that band still sustain itself successfully 10-12 years? Again I'm not against gimmicks... I'd just rather use them as a framework rather than a springboard. A framework that players can come in an out under guise and the crowd really doesn't know differently. A spring board to indicates to me the hot new idea that will advance them today... may not work for them tomorrow or in 4-5 years. I know it sounds like I'm arguing semantics but it's really the way I see bands on the scene. I'd like to think we went the framework route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tim_7string Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 OK. If it doesn't apply to you, then it doesn't apply to you. I have no way to know really.I'm just saying that the writing on the classic rock wall is pretty clear: that genre is dying. Fast. outside of bands with gimmicks or something else really, really remarkable about their performance, the gigs for classic rock bands are drying up and the pay is decreasing. Tell me about it. I'm pushing for newer music all the time, yet what gets requested the most around here? You guessed it, that dead genre, classic rock. I *reluctantly* have to play Sweet Home Alabama and Spirit In The Sky. I'd rather play stuff by The Killers, The Black Keys, Audioslave, Chevelle, etc. all night long. Music has moved on, man. There is still good guitar rock out there. But it is what it is here. I did the travel thing, playing gigs for higher pay. Gas went up, WAY up. By the end of it, I was making the same amount of money or maybe even less than I did when I played gigs in town. So, I decided the best route for me was to play mostly local, go three-piece, take a slightly larger piece of the pie. It's paid off tremendously. I am meeting all the goals I didn't meet in many of the bands I had in the past. Adding a chick or two to dance around to me is almost like...well, cheating. I know that sounds stupid. But you can probably understand what I mean. This band I highlighted, for good, bad or otherwise, has found a way to continue playing classic rock and play good gigs for good money in a market where every other band classic rock has either moved on to modern pop/Top 40, modern country, or faded into oblivion. It's just another approach. Stick a different coat of paint on the car, but it's still an old car. This would be like the classic rock band going Top 40 pop or country or perhaps like you guys are doing with the two female singers up front (which is a better thing than having two women dance around IMO). Adding all kinds of gaudy stuff to the old car would be like the band having dancers, but otherwise playing the same stuff. If bands want to rely on gimmicks to get to the next level, whatever that happens to be in their situation, cool for them. It's not for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wheresgrant3 Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 And Dave... consider this a compliment. If your band were in the same market competing the same songs, playing side by side I'd say your band would ultimately win in my eyes. You have two very attractive singers up front that exude talent. They aren't a window dressing. And that's the making of a great band. The truth is, the other band I'd catch a few songs or maybe stay for a set, but if they aren't doing anything with the music except playing the standard covers I'd probably not stay long. Your band with two dynamic singers, I would be more drawn to the act. Again... musician perspective... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jeff42 Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 quick and to the point. if it would be an increase in pay... I would do it in a second. plus the girls are hot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Potts Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 I would do anything for love but I wont do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EightString Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 That sort of hoopla isn't what my current show is about, but I also don't have anything against it under the right circumstances. If I started getting offers for significantly more money under the condition that it had to be more of a vegas production, I would probably add the dancing girls and costumes with no shame. It wouldn't change the fact that I'm still happy with the musical quality of what I'm presenting, independent of how that lily is gilded. And I too did spandex, makeup, and hairspray in the 80s, so if I had any shame, it probably died a horrible death back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 24, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 Ahhhh but that's the crux isn't it. The window of time. What happens in 3 years of 5 years. I dunno? Do any of us think that far ahead? You put together a band that's as good as it can be today, and you hope for the best. Do they have a long term plan? I dunno. They've already been at it at least 3 years, and I'm sure they have a few more. Do they have an "end game" planned out? Who knows? But I'll guarantee you their last 3 years have been better than what a lot of bands have managed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 24, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 And Dave... consider this a compliment. If your band were in the same market competing the same songs, playing side by side I'd say your band would ultimately win in my eyes. You have two very attractive singers up front that exude talent. They aren't a window dressing. And that's the making of a great band. The truth is, the other band I'd catch a few songs or maybe stay for a set, but if they aren't doing anything with the music except playing the standard covers I'd probably not stay long. Your band with two dynamic singers, I would be more drawn to the act. Again... musician perspective... Yeah, musician perspective. Truth is, we don't compete on the same market. We're getting $4500-5000 a show; those guys with that act are probably pullng $2500 tops. As you and I both can attest, you can only do so much with show and sparkle. To really up the level of the act you have to pay good attention to the music you're playing underneath. But what I see when I look at those guys is a $500-800 classic rock band who figured out a way to triple that virtually overnight, have gotten at least 3 good years out of it so far and, if they play their cards right, work hard, and keep moving the act forward, can continue to do that for some years to come. If not parlay it into something even bigger. But to this point they've done it without making much changes at all to the classic rock format they have built their act around. Which is something many, many people on this forum seem desperately attached to. Which is why I thought it worth bringing this topic up. It's not about the dancing girls per se. Just sayin' that I think there's something there that other bands could learn something from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EightString Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 Although I will say the feather boas and dancing girls are a little incongruous with the LDS missionary uniforms. Once I pictured them riding bikes from door to door, I couldn't unpicture it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SeniorBlues Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 The chicks are a major distraction and will not survive in this group. It gets old - for both the audience and the other performers. I was in a band briefly that tried this and they were soon gone.I have to wonder if these guys made any effort to find girls who could actually do choreography and sing backup besides being young and attractive. Never mind singing lead or playing an instrument . . . just a little musical support that required a little talent and discipline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GCDEF Posted August 24, 2012 Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 That band looks like a lot of fun. I'd join. We already have a look and a way we dress, so that isn't that much of a stretch for me anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 24, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 Although I will say the feather boas and dancing girls are a little incongruous with the LDS missionary uniforms. Once I pictured them riding bikes from door to door, I couldn't unpicture it. This band could probably be a big hit in Utah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted August 24, 2012 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2012 The chicks are a major distraction and will not survive in this group. They've been at it in this format for 3 years so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.