So it's over...

[Kramerguy]

 

These two sentences conflict with each other. You did "compromising" songs because they were getting a better reaction than your old stuff, but then you went back to your old stuff and got an even BETTER reaction? Maybe the BAND just got better and the material wasn't all that relevant? Or maybe the 2nd reaction was one of "fewer people were into it but those fewer had greater enthusaism"? In either case, I think it's a mistake to put too much emphasis on what other bands on doing. If a song will work for your band and it's one you think you can really sell and your crowd will really dig, then the LAST thing I'd worry about is whether Band X plays the same song or not.

 

 

I guess that was a bit contradictory- What I meant was that we did what worked for us, but as we moved forward, we tried to do more "popular" bar songs like SWA. We saw a good reaction initially, so we compromised what we did and started doing more and more songs like SWA. It's really not much different than when we talk about what songs work and what doesn't. Yes, it's all about how you sell it, but also WHO is selling WHAT. SWA never really 'fit'. People loved hearing it but mostly the songs got old and tired very fast. Our crowd maybe like SWA once or twice cause they never heard us play it, but 8 gigs later that song had slowly gotten very tired to us and our crowd. We had picked up so many of those 'crowd pleasers' that we had inadvertently strayed away from what type of band we really are. Our success as a band has been consistently growing, but we're also getting better (3 years in now) at everything we do, so it's hard to track how songs played into it.

 

In the last few months, we've re-embraced our original music format again, new song pickups are more inline with that, and it's having a very positive effect on not just us (happier playing what we like), but the crowds and venues are once again complimenting us how we are so different from all the other bands.. that's something we haven't heard since we had started picking up those "sure fire" songs.. that incidentally every other band does.... that was my point. Hope it makes more sense

[kmart]

And that brings you right back to Journey, Bryan Adams, etc....

No

Way


If those wives/girlfriends get excited by Journey & Bryan Adams or the like, they get exponentially more excited by the Cure, Depeche Mode, Duran Duran, etc.
At least that's my experience.

"Summer of '69" is a dude-rock song; sausage-fest material.

"Girls on Film", on the other hand, gets the ladies to shake their assets, and that's a win for their fellas and a win for us.

And to be totally honest, as weird as it seems, Depeche Mode's "Just Can't Get Enough" gets the guys up and dancing more than the ladies...which we have yet to figure out, but we're certainly not too concerned about it, either.

[Vito Corleone]

 

I guess that was a bit contradictory- What I meant was that we did what worked for us, but as we moved forward, we tried to do more "popular" bar songs like SWA. We saw a good reaction initially, so we compromised what we did and started doing more and more songs like SWA. It's really not much different than when we talk about what songs work and what doesn't. Yes, it's all about how you sell it, but also WHO is selling WHAT. SWA never really 'fit'. People loved hearing it but mostly the songs got old and tired very fast. Our crowd maybe like SWA once or twice cause they never heard us play it, but 8 gigs later that song had slowly gotten very tired to us and our crowd. We had picked up so many of those 'crowd pleasers' that we had inadvertently strayed away from what type of band we really are. Our success as a band has been consistently growing, but we're also getting better (3 years in now) at everything we do, so it's hard to track how songs played into it. In the last few months, we've re-embraced our original music format again, new song pickups are more inline with that, and it's having a very positive effect on not just us (happier playing what we like), but the crowds and venues are once again complimenting us how we are so different from all the other bands.. that's something we haven't heard since we had started picking up those "sure fire" songs.. that incidentally every other band does.... that was my point. Hope it makes more sense

 

 

Funny you bring up SWA because that's a song we don't like doing either. It's on our setlist, and we get a lot of requests for it, but it's not a song we play particularly well so unless someone is throwing down a twenty or something, we're going to just smile at the request and move on.

 

I think very-popular songs need to be a part of pretty much any cover-bands songlist. How MANY you need depends on the band and the situation but every band needs at least a few of those "dancefloor is packed within the first three notes" songs. Just make sure they are the ones that really fit your band. People like and request SWA because it's easily recognizable, easy to dance to and everyone can sing along on the chorus. Great. Every band needs a few songs like that in the songlist. But there are HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of songs that fit that description and you can easily satisfy just about any request for SWA with another one of those songs.

 

The mistake many bands make is they think a song for SWA is a request for Skynyrd, and they'll take a "we don't do SWA but we do 'Needle and the Spoon' instead" attitude. Nah. The person requesting SWA isn't doing so because he's a Skynyrd fan. In fact, that's probably the LAST song a real Skynryd fan wants to hear. So instead of SWA give 'em "You Shook Me" or "Don't Stop Believin" or "Sweet Caroline" or "Shout" or whatever other similarly-popular sing along song you like to do.

[Vito Corleone]

 

No Way If those wives/girlfriends get excited by Journey & Bryan Adams or the like, they get exponentially more excited by the Cure, Depeche Mode, Duran Duran, etc. At least that's my experience.

 

 

Not mine. In fact, one of the reasons we started going down a "more popular song" route in the FIRST place was because of the bandwives requesting them in favor of the more obscure material.

 

 

 

"Summer of '69" is a dude-rock song; sausage-fest material. "Girls on Film", on the other hand, gets the ladies to shake their assets,

 

 

I suppose. But we could compare song-for-song all day long. I'll call your "Girls on Film" and raise you with a "Pour Some Sugar On Me" for lady-asset-shaking all night long.

 

 

And to be totally honest, as weird as it seems, Depeche Mode's "Just Can't Get Enough" gets the guys up and dancing more than the ladies...which we have yet to figure out, but we're certainly not too concerned about it, either.

 

 

Whatever works is what you need to be doing, for sure. And the more you can sell less-common stuff, the better, in my book. I'm just not really buying the "the girls like the more obscure stuff as much or more than the guys do." I've been doing this a long time in a lot of different formats and that has pretty much NEVER been my experience. The main reason bands PLAY the common stuff is primarily for the ladies. Maybe you've all been lucky and landed a few wives with broader tastes, but I'd caution you to not view them as representative of your wider female audience.

[kmart]

I had typed a full response to you but the magic of HC made it go bye-bye via a frozen screen...

Summary:

1) Not saying girls like more obscure songs at all; they like more dance-friendly songs. If PSSOM is what you consider good dance music at a slow and plodding ~90 BPMs, then you and I are talking about different things when we say 'dancing'.

2) Songs like PSSOM or So69 are 'rocking out' songs, not dancing songs, IMO. For that vibe, we've got plenty of stuff: White Wedding, Dancing w/Myself, Should I Stay or Should I Go?, She Sells Sanctuary, even (Don't You) Forget About Me...
And as well as the Leppard or B. Adams goes over for many of you, our 'rockers' go over just as well for the audience who comes to see us: those people wouldn't expect to hear those songs you mentioned in any case, as we're clearly targeting an overall style/genre that they aren't part of.

Ultimately, we've all identified songs that work for what we do that accomplish the same as thosee songs that work in your case: getting people to respond to what you're playing positively...and it all boils down to figuring that out, right?
Perhaps we've made doing so a little more difficult because we've set relatively strong parameters on what we'd consider playing vs. not...but I don't think it's any more difficult, honestly, and the upside, at least for me personally, is the chances are really strong that I'll be playing songs that I otherwise have and continue to like A LOT outside of the band.

[Vito Corleone]

I had typed a full response to you but the magic of HC made it go bye-bye via a frozen screen... Summary: 1) Not saying girls like more obscure songs at all; they like more dance-friendly songs. If PSSOM is what you consider good dance music at a slow and plodding ~90 BPMs, then you and I are talking about different things when we say 'dancing'.

 

When I talk about "dancing", I talk about filling the dance floor. What they do once they get out there doesn't really matter that much to me.

 

 

Ultimately, we've all identified songs that work for what we do that accomplish the same as thosee songs that work in your case: getting people to respond to what you're playing positively...and it all boils down to figuring that out, right?

 

absolutely!

Perhaps we've made doing so a little more difficult because we've set relatively strong parameters on what we'd consider playing vs. not...but I don't think it's any more difficult, honestly, and the upside, at least for me personally, is the chances are really strong that I'll be playing songs that I otherwise have and continue to like A LOT outside of the band.

 

I get that. The other side of it, for me personally, is I'm going to get somewhat tired of ANY song I play. I'd sometimes almost prefer to play songs I DON'T want to listen to outside the band for that reason.

[Vito Corleone]

 

Ultimately, we've all identified songs that work for what we do that accomplish the same as thosee songs that work in your case: getting people to respond to what you're playing positively...and it all boils down to figuring that out, right?

 

 

And, don't get me wrong---I don't have any interest in trying to tell anyone that THIS song WON'T work and THIS song WILL be better. Again, it's all about how you sell them. And I'm sure what you're doing with your band is working well. I'm just making some general comments here....

 

My only point is that I have seen the SAME MISTAKE made a million times by musicians---and that is they find all sorts of ways to justify and convince themselves that certain songs DO work better for them when they don't, simply because they personally like or dislike a particular song. So I'm only trying to make that point so that anyone who MIGHT be falling into that trap might be able to recognize it.

 

One common trap is the "people come up and tell me how much they like that we play uncommon songs" trap. Sure---it's nice when people compliment you, but virtually no one is going to come up and tell you they think your songlist is boring or that they think your band sucks---so just because two guys come up and tell you "how AWESOME they think it was that you pulled out that Kansas b-side from 1974 and how they've never heard ANY band do THAT one before!" ---don't let that outweigh the fact that the joint was almost completely empty before you started your last set simply because that's the compliment you WANT to hear.

 

Another common trap is "My girlfriend really likes this song." That might be a good barometer to use if your girlfriend is among your target audience. But very often--and especially with older musicians--she isn't. I remember back in the days when we would pick songs to learn by throwing 30-40 song ideas on a couple of CDs and letting everybody in the band pick their favorites. Someone would always invariably come back and say "I think we should learn THIS song because I think the crowd is really going to like it!" I'd ask "Well, what makes you think that?" "Well, I played the CD for my wife and that's the one SHE likes the best!. She LOVES that song. We wanna play what the girls want to dance to right?"

 

Well, that's nice and all, but your wife is 45-years old, and she isn't in the mood to come to OUR gigs half the time---never mind the fact that she stopped going out to nightclubs regularly at least 15 years ago...

[cephus]

but then the guitarist got his own "dream gig" of playing in a semi-touring gospel bluegrass band.

 

 

Interesting that the guy whose dream gig is gospel bluegrass would be both boots in on the classic alt thing. I'd have a hard time defining what my dream gig would be, but I know I wouldn't have to load in up 2 flights of stairs.

[tim_7string]

 

I suppose. But we could compare song-for-song all day long. I'll call your "Girls on Film" and raise you with a " Pour Some Sugar On Me " for lady-asset-shaking all night long.

 

 

We have indeed had requests for that one from some comely ladies. Since I already like Def Leppard as do the rest of the boys in the band, it won't be a problem adding it this month.

[kmart]

And, don't get me wrong---I don't have any interest in trying to tell anyone that THIS song WON'T work and THIS song WILL be better. Again, it's all about how you sell them. And I'm sure what you're doing with your band is working well. I'm just making some general comments here.... My only point is that I have seen the SAME MISTAKE made a million times by musicians---and that is they find all sorts of ways to justify and convince themselves that certain songs DO work better for them when they don't, simply because they personally like or dislike a particular song. So I'm only trying to make that point so that anyone who MIGHT be falling into that trap might be able to recognize it. One common trap is the "people come up and tell me how much they like that we play uncommon songs" trap. Sure---it's nice when people compliment you, but virtually no one is going to come up and tell you they think your songlist is boring or that they think your band sucks---so just because two guys come up and tell you "how AWESOME they think it was that you pulled out that Kansas b-side from 1974 and how they've never heard ANY band do THAT one before!" ---don't let that outweigh the fact that the joint was almost completely empty before you started your last set simply because that's the compliment you WANT to hear. Another common trap is "My girlfriend really likes this song." That might be a good barometer to use if your girlfriend is among your target audience. But very often--and especially with older musicians--she isn't. I remember back in the days when we would pick songs to learn by throwing 30-40 song ideas on a couple of CDs and letting everybody in the band pick their favorites. Someone would always invariably come back and say "I think we should learn THIS song because I think the crowd is really going to like it!" I'd ask "Well, what makes you think that?" "Well, I played the CD for my wife and that's the one SHE likes the best!. She LOVES that song. We wanna play what the girls want to dance to right?" Well, that's nice and all, but your wife is 45-years old, and she isn't in the mood to come to OUR gigs half the time---never mind the fact that she stopped going out to nightclubs regularly at least 15 years ago...

 

 

Not in any particular order, but...

 

- 45 years old is perfect for the demo we'd most appeal to. We a-re not aiming at the 21-35 market by any stretch. 35-50 or so. If younger or older want in on the fun, fine, but they aren't expected, nor are we aiming at them. Goes back to what i said in another thread: some customers aren't worth pursuing. For our 'business model', graduating high school between ~'79-'89 is about right.

 

- I'd never use the individual personal anecdote/request as the deciding factor for what to add to any band's play list. There are a ton of songs I'm more fond of that we simply will never attempt because it doesn't make sense in the big picture.

For the classic alt band, we've got ample external data readily available to help understand what songs/acts people in our target demo really want to hear. For one, iTunes rankings by style/genre can be a quick indicator if a song may be a hit or dud, but my personal barometer is largely based on having ~3 hours worth of commute each weekday with Sirius/XM radio turned to the First Wave -Classic Alternative (Coincidence? No.) station (And their Facebook page). Like any other radio station, it becomes pretty obvious which songs are being requested more often/regularly, etc. And obviously everyone in the band weighs in with suggestions/opinions as well, but I believe we're all on the same page enough with regard to throwing any potential songs against the 'generally catchy/known/danceable/up-tempo' wall as well. And then the proof is in playing it...

If it doesn't work, it doesn't work, period.

[Vito Corleone]

 

Not in any particular order, but... - 45 years old is perfect for the demo we'd most appeal to. We a-re not aiming at the 21-35 market by any stretch. 35-50 or so. If younger or older want in on the fun, fine, but they aren't expected, nor are we aiming at them. Goes back to what i said in another thread: some customers aren't worth pursuing. For our 'business model', graduating high school between ~'79-'89 is about right.

 

 

That's cool as long as you can get that demo to come out and see you guys. That's the hitch with older material---the further you get away from the few classics that have lived on through the years (and every band plays to death) and the more you stick to stuff that you pretty much had-to-be-alive-then to remember, the fewer and fewer people there are who go out to see live music on a weekend. You're in Chicago, IIRC? Yeah, a band playing almost ANYTHING can build a following in a city that big if they are good enough and put on a good enough show, I would think. Big market to draw from there.

[mstreck]

The "classic alt" band I tried to put together is officially dead and buried. First we lost our bass player who the other two (and I actually agreed) was irreplaceable. After several months hiatus, I tried a couple of other guys but time issues were always a problem since we all played in other bands. We were actually close to getting on stage by the end of 2011, but then the guitarist got his own "dream gig" of playing in a semi-touring gospel bluegrass band. So...my dream of having my own band with my choice of players and format is dead. At least I still have my regular band, but giving up on my own thing was tough.

 

Man, that sucks. I was really pulling for that one. Sorry, Cooter...

[nomadh]

I may be getting to the same point with one of my dream bands. A grunge era band as a sideline. I like my main blues/classic rock band and the people in it. But they don't keep busy enough for me and I have other sides I'd like to explore. Besides blues comes too natural to me. I want to do something not natural for me. I found a really impressive soundgarden/ alice in chains type singer and though I was on my way. Problem is months later and he still has no ride to practice. Drummers keep dropping out. Probably because they noticed the guy with no ride. The singer did find a bass player in his area who is a "pro" level player. But oops, he also has no wheels.... and no bass at the moment, and not to up to speed on odd time Soundgarden stuff. Anyway its fading fast. I need a singer like this guy to do these songs but it just goes to show you the first level is the core of the personnel not songlist. Once again 90% of any job is just showing up. This does remind me of how lucky I am to have a group with dedicated enough, compatible enough, regular people with similar enough interests that I can get along with. Oh well maybe my next try will be a southern rock cover band or a UFO/Scorpions cover......

[BATCAT]

Classic alt pretty much envelopes 70s and 80s punk, new wave and alternative and lots of "MTV bands" from early in the network's history and into the early 90s. Everything from the Ramones to Flock of Seagulls to REM, to The Smithereens, to The Smiths, and so on. A lot of late 90s alt has found its way to classic status as well, like Green Day, Weezer, Cake, etc.

 

 

I would totally try out to play in a cover band that did that stuff, and I've never once considered playing in a cover band.

[cooterbrown]

I haven't completely given up hope on that project...but I will be 45 in October, and I do appreciate the luxury of having a good band that gets along and works often more and more, as the years go by.

December of this year will be my 10th year in this band that has a 25-year performance history.

[Vito Corleone]

I haven't completely given up hope on that project...but I will be 45 in October, and I do appreciate the luxury of having a good band that gets along and works often more and more, as the years go by. December of this year will be my 10th year in this band that has a 25-year performance history.

 

 

It's hard to put a value on that longevity. My band has made a lot of strides in the last couple of years as we've shifted directions towards trying to be a big-deal corporate band. But I don't think any of it would have gone as smoothly or quickly if the 4 guys in the band hadn't been together for years already.