It's settled: Do what you want. It's all good.

[SLScott86]

I continue to side with Dave on most of this stuff. Like I said, my first reaction to him on this forum was "this guy is a douche." I think due to his abrasiveness people are out to "get him good" so to speak. Past the point of the actual argument.

 

That stuff matters

Yeah, that stuff matters, but it's not as important as this stuff.

Yeah, of course this stuff is most important. That stuff still matters.

Sounds like an excuse for not focusing on this stuff.

 

This can go on all day if you keep attacking the guy, because fact is he hasn't been wrong, and all that's left to argue is semantics. And vice versa.

[3shiftgtr]

Again, you're building a strawman. No one have ever said just play the {censored}ing song, put on a good show, get paid and go home. Certainly not me. I rail on here CONSTANTLY about people being better. About bands being better. About putting emphasis on vocals. My "just play the {censored}ing song" comment was simply directed at the idea that at SOME point you have to get up on stage and just play the {censored}ing song. Especially for those of us playing pop and classic rock--which is the majority of people here, it seems. Yes, we can be better musicians. Yes, we should all strive to do that. But to what degree am I going to sit and home and worry about the theortical construct of Another Brick In The Wall when my job is simply to get up there and play it as well as I can? Yeah, you can go overboard with that {censored}. Especially with such simple songs. It's Pink Floyd. It's "Another Brick In The Wall". Shut up about the theory and just play the {censored}ing song and entertain the people with it. That's your job. As a band.

 

So I say look at the perspective, and you argue details and context.

 

Some things never change.

 

You admit that you don't spend much time working on music that exists outside of your gig. You've only got so much time, right? You have to work on the non music details of the gig or else you won't be gigging, right? Wade can sit on top of his throne cuz he doesn't have a gig right now, right?

 

I'm asking you questions, dude...that's how I ended the last post....you keep trying to win something by just reviewing contextual details over and over.

 

Do you feel that working on music outside your gig, the stuff that makes you a better musician and improves your musicianship as it is applied to settings other than your gig, a worthy endeavor? Is it worthy of your time?

 

Do you spend time doing it? Do you work on Dvorak? Improvising over Giant Steps? Hannon? etc? Or do you have too much to do and you need to spend that time getting the parts right for the breakdown in "Rebel Yell" cuz it was requested by the buyer? Does getting better in other areas help you to meet your goals?

 

IS THERE SOMETHING MORE TO BE GAINED BY DOING THAT?

[kmart]

Improvising is for people who can't make up their mind.

[3shiftgtr]

 

This can go on all day if you keep attacking the guy, because fact is he hasn't been wrong, and all that's left to argue is semantics. And vice versa.

 

 

I've been arguing with him for the past 2 years! So has everyone else....many of his points stand on argumentative degrees....and for those of us that know him, that's why we lubs him! It's the sparring back and forth that points get brought up, and stuff contributed.

 

It might get juicy, but never heated. Guido knows who he is, and who I am, and who everyone else is. We are all good with that as we all realize this is the interwebs.....

 

G da man, mang!

[3shiftgtr]

 

Improvising is for people who can't make up their mind.

 

 

LOL! IT was just a matter of time....

[caeman]

 

Improvising is for people who can't make up their mind.

 

 

Improvising an integral aspect of the blues. Also, many a bluegrass tune is open to a soloist improvising over the normal melody. It takes skill and dedication to be able to improvise and make it sound good. Improvising is not for lazy people, as it will show to the audience that you just don't know what you are doing. Only BB King and SRV can play and hold the same not for 8 measures and be considered good. The rest of us have to be different.

[Vito Corleone]

 

Thanks. Let me return the favor and ask you: do you have a "music stand" attitude to getting better as a musician, or is it as the OP title states "It's settled: Do what you want. It's all good."....does it just not matter that much? Is your advocacy against music stands a symbol of your apathy towards the "something else" element of music?

 

 

No. Of course not. But remember, this is a BAND forum not just a MUSICIAN forum. Some bands ARE nothing but "all about the music", but for 99% of them it involves other stuff. Which is what this forum is largely about. For the guys that are good enough players and in good enough bands that they can be concerned about NOTHING but the music---more power to them. I don't know how many of us around here are at that level though. I know I'm certainly not. I know Wade certainly isn't. Are you? Maybe. But most of us are not and never will be regardless of how much we wish that to be the case or mistakenly believe that we are.

 

But even at your level of playing and gigging---which I respect IMMENSELY--you should know what I'm talk about here to a large degree:

 

You get a call for a pick up gig this weekend. Band won't be rehearsing. Fine. It's a classic rock/top 40 gig. Just send you over the MP3s and the songlist. Oh, you know 3/4s of this stuff already--played it a million times. Cool. Just give you the key and you're good to go. You'll be able to pick up the arrangement and road map on the fly. The other stuff? Listen to the MP3s a couple of times and go over it, make a few notes, and you'll be fine. Some more time to rehearse--especially with the band--would be great, but their just isn't time for that. You've got a gig with your jazz band on Thursday and Friday night you have to be at the kid's piano recital. You'd like to spend some more time working on just general practice, but you've got to learn these new songs, and you don't REALLY need any more general practice to be good enough to play Bad Moon Rising on Saturday. Besides, you need to change your strings and get the suit you need to wear for the gig to the cleaners.

 

Did I just say "good enough"? Yeah, I did. But you're a pro, you've done this for years, and you know you've got the skills to nail the gig--even if you won't play 100% flawlessly--and you have to set priorities because doing the gig requires more than just being the most fantabulous guitarist you can possibly be.

 

You can take THAT position---or you can take the position that unless you've worked and worked and worked to get everything down as fantastially as is humanly possible, you can't do the gig. In which case, you'll never do it. Because, at some point, you JUST HAVE TO PLAY THE DAMNED SONG.

 

You chided me earlier that someone who hasn't mastered their instrument really shouldn't be telling others to not use a music stand because it looks bad. And there may be some validity to that point. But the other side of that others shouldn't be telling me to spend my time mastering my instrument when they aren't even gigging and, from what I can tell, have never played in a gigging band that ever amounted to much. Because the one thing I CAN do well is gig. I know how to gig. I know how to put together successful bands that gig a lot, play good gigs, make good money, and that people really, really like. If musicians don't like the work I do because it doesn't live up to their own ideals of what a 'good' band should be about? Fine. To each his own. But I know how to put together and market a band. I've done it repeatedly over my career and each time taken the band to the top tier of the market we were trying to play for. Have they sometimes been schlocky cover bands? Sure. Purposely so. There's a lot of schlocky cover bands out there. They aren't all successful. It takes work to do it right.

 

So yeah, I'll continue to preach my "wisdom" here and people can choose to use what they can use and ignore the rest, or ignore all of it. That's as it should be. If you've done great in your career by ignoring everything I talk about? Wonderful. Speak up and teach others how to achieve the same things you have because I'm sure many would like to follow that path. But I haven't seen you do that. You talk about how you did it without doing certain things but you never talk about what you did as the alternative method. Just be the best fantabulous guitarist you can be? Is that all there is to it? Obviously not. There are 1,000s of those guys sitting in their bedrooms and home studios as we speak who never have and never will accomplish {censored}. You had to do more than just be good at your instrument to be successful. Share the secrets of your success.

 

For me, I've always been a "grab the bull by the horns" kind of guy. I'm not afraid to bite off a bit more than I can chew and then work my ass off to meet the demands I put upon myself. That's the path I take to improve myself. A top-down approach, I guess. Put together the big band, book the big gigs and then worry about how I'm going to not {censored} it up. And often that means making some compromises along the way, and some of those compromises end up being musical. It's inevitable. But rather than practice my ass off to make sure I never miss a note, I'm not afraid to miss a note or two and then work to make sure I don't make that same mistake the next time.

 

The other path is the guys that sit at home, rehearse until their fingers bleed, become the best players they can possibly be, and then swing their door open and say "here I am! Who wants to hire me?" That can work for some, as long as they don't fall into the trap of never leaving the basement because they never believe they are 'good enough'. But that approach just isn't me and never has been. I need definate, attainable and foreseeable goals. Give me a goal, and I'll figure out the A, B, C and D that needs to be done to reach it and then let's get to work.

[Vito Corleone]

 

I'm asking you questions, dude...that's how I ended the last post....you keep trying to win something by just reviewing contextual details over and over. Do you feel that working on music outside your gig, the stuff that makes you a better musician and improves your musicianship as it is applied to settings other than your gig, a worthy endeavor? Is it worthy of your time?

 

 

Of course. Really, I think I've answered that question in the affirmative many times now. Of course it is a worthy endeavor. If you have the time. But the gig is the gig. You gotta do what you gotta do.

 

Like a lot of musicians, I got most of my studying Dvorak out of the way earlier in life so I'd HAVE the time now to focus on other details required to being in a successful band. But OF COURSE there's something more to be gained by doing that. And I try to squeeze it in when I can. But I'm not going to stop gigging, or stop doing the stuff that needs to be done to make the gig successful to do that. YMMV.

[flemtone]

 

I am a gospel musician. I don't get paid. It is a choice I made and I happily accept. Things have been helped out greatly once I got endorsed by Cave Passive Pedals. It comes down to doing what *I* want with my music life, and this is what I want to do. I get calls and invites to play often and I couldn't be happier. And, doing it all on a budget and not worrying about some anonymous person in another part of the world who isn't contributing to my music ministry in any positive way. As per the title of this thread, I am doing what I want, and it is all good. I never wear shorts on stage. I sometimes use a music stand. And I always wear the hat.

 

 

Wow. Interesting 'ministry'. What denomination would that be again?

[kmart]

 

LOL! IT was just a matter of time....

 

 

You set 'em up on the tee, I'll keep swinging for the fences all day long.

[kmart]

 

LOL! IT was just a matter of time....

 

 

You set 'em up on the tee, I'll keep swinging for the fences all day long.

[Vito Corleone]

 

Do you spend time doing it? Do you work on Dvorak? Improvising over Giant Steps? Hannon? etc? Or do you have too much to do and you need to spend that time getting the parts right for the breakdown in "Rebel Yell" cuz it was requested by the buyer? Does getting better in other areas help you to meet your goals? IS THERE SOMETHING MORE TO BE GAINED BY DOING THAT?

 

 

Again, yes.

 

But let's be clear here about this thread and this discussion. Not to keep dragging Wade into it, but his comment and my reply IS what brought you into the conversation, is it not?

 

A couple of weeks ago, Wade was bragging about how he was playing in three bands, getting his gear together, rehearsing specific parts to songs, etc etc etc. Then one day he announces he quit all those bands "for personal reasons" and has since started going on about the virtues of getting back to the basics of tonal theory or whatever else it was he was yapping on about earlier. Again, there's nothing wrong and everything right about paying attention to that stuff and it can certainly help ones musicianship, in and out of their present band, to do that. But Wade's holier-than-thou attitude about focusing on the musicianship in this case pretty obviously (in my view) stems from needing to justify his current situation to himself. "I stopped gigging in part so I could work on being the best bass player I can be...."

 

....hookay. Whatever. Tell yourself whatever you need to tell yourself to get through the day. I get that. We're all human. But if you are going to slam what I do in the process, yeah, I'll strike back.

 

That's valiant that you rose to his defense, and I understand your take on his position, but I just thought you should understand (if you didn't already) that my replies were based a bit more on a history that goes beyond just what was specifically stated in this thread.

[StratGuy22]

Wow. Interesting 'ministry'. What denomination would that be again?

 

The Church of Rock, of course!!!

 

 

[caeman]

 

Wow. Interesting 'ministry'. What denomination would that be again?

 

 

The non kind. Old-time gospel and appalachian hymns know no such artificial categories as Baptist or Pentecostal.

[modulusman]

 

The non kind. Old-time gospel and appalachian hymns know no such artificial categories as Baptist or Pentecostal.

 

 

I'm guessing their is a shortage of hot girls at those kind of shows.

[caeman]

No, it's not exactly booty-shaking music. But it has its audience. If I wanted booty shakin', I would target country music. There is a lot of booty shakin' goin' thar.

[benzem]

 

You set 'em up on the tee, I'll keep swinging for the fences all day long.

 

 

Rock AND F'n Roll bro!....Rock and freakin ROLL!

[Piano Whore]

For me it's my book of Beethoven sonatas I bring out when I have the time to keep my sight-reading skills still somewhat working and to keep my chops up. And the old Czerny workbooks "The School of Velocity" and "The Art of Finger Dexterity". I wish I had more time to devote to that stuff, but at the same time, I can play "Moves Like Jagger" PRETTY well and that IS what my next paying gig calls for...

 

 

I have, somewhere in a dusty stack of books, the Hanon that a teacher made me buy. I don't remember ever even cracking it open. I make up my own exercises to strengthen the 4th and 5th fingers, since they're the weakest and the reason why one part of Hoedown gives me trouble to play smoothly. Other practice consists of playing anything else that has been tripping me up, and also I have gotten into working on hand independence - for example, trying to do the Superstition clav part with left hand while doing the horn parts with the right, all to a click. I'm not there yet, but it's not much different than when I learned the Peanuts theme as a kid- if you want to do it badly enough (as opposed to doing it badly) you'll have the patience to break it down. I look forward to trying some of the things Lee Knight talked about RE getting a better groove going. BTW I'm not actually at all into Rachmnaninoff, for Russian stuff I revisit a Katchaturian piece I learned in college. I got into a little Mozart, Bach and Debussy but I'm more into Scott Joplin.

[Piano Whore]

Wow. Good memory.QUOTE]

 

That's what you get for saying stuff that people actually REMEMBER. Because, the dissonance is CRUSHING (that's a phrase Wade came up with 10 years ago on the KSS forum, talking about the last chord in the Pink Panther theme ).

 

It's all good, at least I hope it is.

[Vito Corleone]

I have, somewhere in a dusty stack of books, the Hanon that a teacher made me buy. I don't remember ever even cracking it open. I make up my own exercises to strengthen the 4th and 5th fingers, since they're the weakest and the reason why one part of Hoedown gives me trouble to play smoothly. Other practice consists of playing anything else that has been tripping me up, and also I have gotten into working on hand independence - for example, try ing to do the Superstition clav part with left hand while doing the horn parts with the right, all to a click. I'm not there yet, but it's not much different than when I learned the Peanuts theme as a kid- if you want to do it badly enough (as opposed to doing it badly) you'll have the patience to break it down. I look forward to trying some of the things Lee Knight talked about RE getting a better groove going. BTW I'm not actually at all into Rachmnaninoff, for Russian stuff I revisit a Katchaturian piece I learned in college. I got into a little Mozart, Bach and Debussy but I'm more into Scott Joplin.

 

Yikes! I can't even do that "Superstition" clav part right with two hands, let alone one! Good on you for that!

 

I got into Joplin a bit as a kid. "The Entertainer" was a big hit then. I remember working up "Maple Leaf Rag" for a piano recital. Fun to do that 'bouncing' left hand part between the lower octaves and the chords. And the Peanuts theme. I remember how cool it was when I figured out how the two parts fit together rhythmically. I love that Guaraldi stuff. I brush up on a lot of the Charlie Brown Christmas stuff every year and play it for friends or between songs at gigs. Always a crowd pleaser.

[3shiftgtr]

No. Of course not. .

 

Thought so!

 

So then, why does the music stand have to become a symbol for laziness rather than some arbitrary standard like say, the lack of ability for pianists to play thru Hannon (or whatever)?

 

Wait! Don't answer that....none of us need 10 more pages on this.

 

I mean, it's just becomes a ridiculous prejudice. A music stand should never REPRESENT anything. Yes the stage looks better, yes it's not in the rock/pop tradition, yes it's a crutch....but a symbol for laziness? The same can be said for being able to solo over Giant Steps....it WILL help you play better solos, your ear WILL get better, you WILL have more command over your instrument, you WILL connect with the music more....or having good lights; you WILL look better, your audience WILL connect with you better visually, etc....but a band with music stands is lazy cuz of what it REPRESENTS? That is what the statement implies.

 

The music stand as a symbol for laziness is too arbitrary. And since you point out that this is a BAND forum and not a MUSICIAN forum (another 10 pages just right there!), why isn't it lights? Or having color coordinated mic stands?

 

It's not a strawman...if it is NOT all relative (like the OP says), and {censored} DOES matter (like you say), then why make the music stand the symbol? Having a symbol for laziness is....lazy.

[Vito Corleone]

Thought so! So then, why does the music stand have to become a symbol for laziness rather than some arbitrary standard like say, the lack of ability for pianists to play thru Hannon (or whatever)?

 

They both can. Again, it ALL matters.

 

You keep wanting to frame this as a one-or-the-other deal. If I mention music stands, then I don't care about musicianship. The idea is to do it all. Or as much of it all as one can manage.

 

I mean, it's just becomes a ridiculous prejudice. A music stand should never REPRESENT anything. Yes the stage looks better, yes it's not in the rock/pop tradition, yes it's a crutch....but a symbol for laziness?

 

In this forum, yes. I think "music stands and shorts" has become shorthand for "not taking your visual presentation seriously" among forum members since we've all talked about those things so much. That's all I mean by saying it's a symbol for laziness.

[kmart]

 

It's not a strawman...if it is NOT all relative (like the OP says), and {censored} DOES matter (like you say), then why make the music stand the symbol?

 

 

Why?

 

Because in the cases being discussed here...IT'S RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF EVERYONE.

 

It's the focus because it's being put into a place of focus.

 

I don't know that you can't solo over Giant Steps (and frankly, I could give a crap if you can) unless you SHOW me that you can't. If you're playing pretty much anything any bar/club band plays in the gigantic realm that encompasses modern pop/rock/etc., that doesn't matter to be blunt.

And I don't know what you don't show me.

 

But when one plops that music stand right on the front of the stage (often in front of one's face), it's kind of hard to miss, don;t you think?

 

It's symbolic because it's obvious and visible.

[3shiftgtr]

 

Why? Because in the cases being discussed here...IT'S RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF EVERYONE. It's the focus because it's being put into a place of focus. But when one plops that music stand right on the front of the stage (often in front of one's face), it's kind of hard to miss, don;t you think? It's symbolic because it's obvious and visible.

 

 

Then it's prejudicial. Your assuming what is 'obvious and visible' connotates laziness. Do you associate black skin with laziness? Just cuz you saw a lazy black person doesn't mean all black people are lazy. If you see a great band and they have a music stand on stage they are lazy? Same logic.

 

You are taking a practical stance to an impractical proposition. Music performance is not about any one thing. And making it about any one thing (like a music stand) just because you can see it is prejudicial, unfair and shallow.

 

 

I don't know that you can't solo over Giant Steps (and frankly, I could give a crap if you can) unless you SHOW me that you can't. If you're playing pretty much anything any bar/club band plays in the gigantic realm that encompasses modern pop/rock/etc., that doesn't matter to be blunt. And I don't know what you don't show me.

 

 

If you think that "what you don't show me" doesn't matter then you need to inform higher education of their lack of contribution to society. So every class you took that does not contribute to exactly what you do now in a literal and visual fashion is of no matter?

 

If you think that learning something beyond what you need to play for your gig won't help you with your gig, then I'm done. It's the "Idiocracy" mindset. I was goading guido with this cuz I knew he didn't feel this way. Do you?

[BATCAT]

So it is actually settled?