On stage attire, music stands, "Dad bands", etc...

[wheresgrant3]

FYI - The absolute best agency coverband in my area...Wears shorts and has no light show of their own. They play up and down the east coast, from the Maryland shore to Connecticut, and get $2k+ per show. Booked at least 3 days a week, usually 4, and quite ofter 2 shows a day in the summer. Their PA is 2 Yamaha clubs and 2 Yamaha subs. The bass player mixes the sound (out front) for the first couple of songs whill someone subs for him on bass. Then he joins the group on stage, and I don't think they change much for the rest of the show. Goddam best band ever.

Um... if you are thinking about the band I think you are thinking about let me provide some correction/context:

#1- They earn on average more than $2K per show... more like $3-5K
#2- They have dedicated sound and lighting guys... Perhaps at some small club in NJ (their back yard) you've seen them setup in this manner... at clubs we've played a 17' box truck pulls up with a crew of 3-4 guys show up hours before to setup backline, lighting truss, soundboard.
#3- They wear shorts... though that is part of their act/schtick. Consider it part of their 'uniform'. They aren't wearing them because they just pulled something out of the hamper on the way to a gig.
#4- Have have a pretty detailed 'contract rider' which I've actually seen. Lots of requirements on behalf of the club and personel.

There is nothing 'backyard' about the band you've described. They've been a $6-7 figure touring entity for nearly 20 years now, having played on MTV, The Carson Daly Show, sporting events, even with Jon Bon Jovi at the Stone Pony. Nothing that ordinary about them at all. Again perhaps you saw them at some offshore bar they've played off and on for years, that decided to hired them for an afternoon at their 'bottom' rate. Maybe that's why they showed up with a few Yamaha speakers. When they show up north, if the club doesn't have in house sound and lights, they have a full sound and light team. I know it's a big headache for the clubs that hire them. They get there hours before the performance. I know one club that paid $5K for a recent Friday night appearance. With required advertising it cost them nearly $10K when all was said and done.

That's 'IF' you are talking about the band I think you are talking about (couldn't imagine any other ). If so, there is nothing really ordinary about them.

[wheresgrant3]

These guys bring a "SHOW". Shorty is almost 4 feet high, which is a bit of their gimick. Him and the bass player cut each other up, joke and basically horse around. They have a horn section (The Jersey Horns), and the Sax guy is from Southside Johnny. Oh, and they can PLAY. It's all covers/dance/pop music, and the dance floor is full from start to finish. No one can touch them. And, when Shorty drives around in the crowd in his motorized car (a converted Barbie kids car, dressed up for whatever season it is), with a wireless mic and keyboard, the crowd goes wild!!!!! Disclaimer - No, I'm not in this band, but I do take guitar lessons from the bass player. This is the nicest bunch of guys ever. Here's some links: https://www.facebook.com/shortylongrocks http://shortylongrocks.com/ Oh, ages range from 40 to 20yrs old

My bad... I thought you were talking about The Nerds which is undisputedly most successful/popular cover band in NJ thru New England the last 20 years... I've heard of Shorty... and a good band they may be, they aren't close to the business entity of the former band I spoke about. Pretty much a Philly based regional band to DE/MAR/South NJ.

I'm sure they are 'good'. 'BEST' is pretty subjective.

[germs_2]

a lot of bands WILL fall into the same trap: start off strong, and then fall into the "comfort zone": same songs, same sets, same everything as everyone else.

 

the bands Making It are the ones who are able to rise above and stay fresher, more current, or whatever "better" than everyone else. plain and simple. if your band doesn't have the drive to do that, then you won't be at the top tier of your local scene.

 

venues have been taken advantage of for too long by "bands" who show up, play the same songs as the other band last week, don't have a stage show to entertain, don't play danceable (or Customer Attractive) music, and generally just want to get paid to show up and half-ass for 4 hours while they drink beer on the house tab. oh, and then they want to get paid at least $100 per man for their efforts.

 

crowds are sick of it, venues are sick of it.

 

like i said, the ones that break that cycle and do something different, unique, and entertaining are the ones staying busy...

[Vito Corleone]

Here's some links: https://www.facebook.com/shortylongrocks http://shortylongrocks.com/ Oh, ages range from 40 to 20yrs old

 

 

Good website and promo. But I think you overstate the casualness of this band by quite a bit. For one thing, this band look AWFULLY gimmicky. (In a good way, of course) They are playing up the short-dude angle for all its worth. And they aren't wearing shorts in their promo shot nor in most of the video clips.

 

And like you said, while the music may be hot, they clearly are using a lot of comedy, horsing around and kiddie-cars to help sell the product. Hardly a "dad" band by any standard definition here!

 

Hot chick too.

 

But I don't see any shorts in ANY of these clips.....

 

http://www.shortylongrocks.com/welcome/videos.php

[Lee Flier]

What if Joe's not trying to build a following...simply doing it for fun? I fully believe there are people out there that play just to have fun and maybe feel like a rockstar for a night.

 

Sure. But I wasn't talking about Joe. I was talking about other bands who ARE trying to build a following and need venues with foot traffic to do it. And the venues need that, too. If Joe wants to feel like a rockstar for a night, for fun, then no problem - there are plenty of places for him to play - open mic nights, friends' parties, etc. But when Joe starts playing places where bands are trying to build a following, and people quit going to the club, then there's a problem.

 

This is obviously already happening, and people already know what to expect when they walk in these places. In this area anyway, these places are in {censored}ty locations and don't really get much 'passer by' traffic at all, if any. The people that go there know the owner and probably know Joe and the Stanks personally, and if not then they know some similarly cruddy band is "rocking" the stage.

 

If those are the only kinds of places in your town that will hire Joe, then you're fortunate. In many places, some of the best venues in town are hiring a parade of Joes, often trading in a past good reputation for a cheap and easy short term profit.

 

That's what differentiates the 'classes' of clubs. There are the bars where you know that the bands generally aren't very good, and there are the bars where you know you're going to see a good band whenever you walk in the door. Granted I was only 5 at the end of the 80s...but I suspect there have always been hack clubs and hack bands, and there always will be.

 

Yes - and again, that would be fine if there were also a good number of places where you could still trust you'd see a good band. Those places are very few and far between now, and that's my point. Because what good venue owners used to consider their responsibility - advertising, and booking good talent so that people would be attracted to their club - has now been passed on to the bands. And once that happened, things went to hell in a hurry. That happened at the end of the 80s in L.A, and had spread here to Atlanta around the end of the 90s. A lot of people now don't know that it was ever any other way.

 

Most people don't think more than 1 or 2 steps ahead of NOW at best. But people are going to do what they're going to do. Period. And I don't waste minutes of my life worrying about what other dip {censored}s are doing with their time. What-the-f-ever.

 

Well then you are part of the problem - though at least you admit it.

 

What I'd like to know is what solutions are there really? Honest question. Bar owner can't afford to hire a good band, becuase he has no customers, because his bar is in an area in a dumpy town where nobody has any disposable income and becuase he's soiled his rep to those that do, but if he stops hiring Joe and the Stanks, he won't even have Joe's 8 buddies in there drinking cheap whiskey, and he'll be closing the doors because without that he's got literally nothing to offer.

 

The guy in the {censored}ty location like that, like I say, I don't have a problem with it. Those places have always been around, like you say. But for a club in a good area with lots of people walking by - it's called investing. You spend the money to advertise and to hire good bands, and take the loss for awhile until you build a reputation. And if you don't do that, IMO, you're an idiot and your club is never going to reach its potential. And neither are a lot of good bands looking for good places to play.

 

For those who say "tough {censored}, that's just the way things are," I say... bull{censored}. People created this situation and people can change it. At the very least, we have a perfect right to call out the situation for what it is: stupid for all concerned parties.

 

As far as what we musicians can do about it, I believe that's what my entire OP was about.

[Shamdog]

Good website and promo. But I think you overstate the casualness of this band by quite a bit. For one thing, this band look AWFULLY gimmicky. (In a good way, of course) They are playing up the short-dude angle for all its worth. And they aren't wearing shorts in their promo shot nor in most of the video clips. And like you said, while the music may be hot, they clearly are using a lot of comedy, horsing around and kiddie-cars to help sell the product. Hardly a "dad" band by any standard definition here! Hot chick too. But I don't see any shorts in ANY of these clips..... http://www.shortylongrocks.com/welcome/videos.php

 

 

They have a couple "regular" spots here. One is an every Thursday, and one is an every Sunday afternoon. That's where they're casual. They also play in the casinos in AC, CT, and PA. I'm sure they dress appropriately, and it looks like where most of that stuff was shot.

 

My point was that what you where is not as important as how you wear it. These guys are pros all the way down the line, no question about it.

 

As for the gimick - yes, it is. But, that dude can play and sing (and party like a mofo). The hot chick sings like a bird, too. And the horns are just so tight. It's really an unbelievable show. More like a party than a show, actually.

[Shamdog]

For the record, I'm in a Dad Band, and we suck.

[wheresgrant3]

In my market (which has very few 'destination' level clubs) I've never seen a sub par band rewarded with more gigs. In my market most clubs are dependent on the band's draw, so a hobby band with no following or a below average band with even some following are not going to be asked back. That simple. Those bands undoubtable help us, raise our pay, and draw more audience. They offer much less competition. It's funny how many small bars hire us because they are trying to reignite a 'band night' after chasing patrons away with bad bands. I've also never felt threatened by any band that plays an identical setlist, copies our moves/dress, calls themselves the best 'whatever' band in the area... simply because offer nothing to differentiate themselves from us. All people and club owners can do is stack a comparison, and since we are the band setting the bar (they are merely copying the show) we'll always win out in that debate.

Maybe if I were in a more competitive market or one where the clubs were filled regardless whoever played I'd feel differently. But seriously I don't have any problem with 'Joe and the Stanks' or any other band jamming for pleasure and fun. Regardless of the talent involved on the presentation side, they create a wide gap for comparison, and only help to keep my band healthily employed.

[Vito Corleone]

My point was that what you where is not as important as how you wear it. These guys are pros all the way down the line, no question about it.

 

 

+1000 and I think that's been mentioned here before by many: it's really about how you BRING it. No doubt shorts are fine for certain bands/certain situations. And these guys are clearly pro enough to know when it's right and when it isn't.

 

The problem is when guys think it doesn't matter one way or the other.

 

And yeah...I'm all about the gimmick. These guys look like a FUN band. If I'm ever back east, they'll be on my short list of bands "to see".

[Shamdog]

+1000 and I think that's been mentioned here before by many: it's really about how you BRING it. No doubt shorts are fine for certain bands/certain situations. And these guys are clearly pro enough to know when it's right and when it isn't. The problem is when guys think it doesn't matter one way or the other. And yeah...I'm all about the gimmick. These guys look like a FUN band. If I'm ever back east, they'll be on my short list of bands "to see".

Hit me up...I'll take you.

[Vito Corleone]

Yes - and again, that would be fine if there were also a good number of places where you could still trust you'd see a good band. Those places are very few and far between now, and that's my point. Because what good venue owners used to consider their responsibility - advertising, and booking good talent so that people would be attracted to their club - has now been passed on to the bands. And once that happened, things went to hell in a hurry. That happened at the end of the 80s in L.A, and had spread here to Atlanta around the end of the 90s. A lot of people now don't know that it was ever any other way.

 

 

I dunno, Lee. I certainly feel what you're saying, but I also can't help but wonder if you're just longing for a bye-gone era.---"If only some responsible clubowners would step up to the plate, it could be just like it USED to be...."

 

I just don't know that a big part of the problem isn't that times have changed so much that the market for good live music can't ever be the same. I think other things have to change as well.

 

Is it really reasonable to expect the old paradigm of "musicians standing on stage playing songs in a 4/5 piece band" to be enough in 2011 and beyond? EVERYTHING else has changed so much in the last few decades but live music is largely the same as it has always been.

 

Isn't it almost like asking people to get excited about your new TV show and then giving it to them on a black-and-white cathode ray tube set?

[Lee Flier]

In my market (which has very 'destination' level clubs) I've never seen a sub par band rewarded with more gigs.

 

Me either. That's not how it works. How it works is they get a different "Joe" in every night who can bring in a bunch of their buddies for one night. They know it'll never happen again, so Joe never gets another gig. But Bob does, who sucks just as much as Joe, and has a different set of buddies who'll come and watch him play rockstar for a night. In a large metropolitan area, there's an endless supply of Joes and Bobs, so this actually works for awhile until the rent goes up or something of that nature.

 

It's funny how many small bars hire us because they are trying to reignite a 'band night' after chasing patrons away with bad bands.

 

We've had that happen too, but it's usually been too little too late. I can't tell you how many times we've played the last week that a bar stays open. Like they suddenly have a revelation that hey, if they hire a good band and pay them decently, maybe people will start coming back! But by that time they're already deep in the hole and if things don't turn around in a few weeks (which rarely happens), they close. Or stop having bands altogether.

[TrickyBoy]

 

My point was that what you where is not as important as how you wear it. These guys are pros all the way down the line, no question about it.

 

 

This is the crux of the point. The list of "must haves" is a very short list. And neither lights nor sound system in on it. HOWEVER, generally speaking, bands that make the investment in themselves to get a nice light show and sound system are generally better bands. Are they better because they have the lights, absolutely not. They are better because they pay attention to the details and they care, and investing in lights and sound IS a detail that can differentiate you from other bands.

 

We could go round and round on whether this or that is important. But going back to Lee's initial point, the fact that the band on stage really gives a {censored} about what they are doing comes across to the crowd. And making investments into the final product (whether they be time investments or monetary investments) is a sign of giving a {censored}.

[Lee Flier]

I dunno, Lee. I certainly feel what you're saying, but I also can't help but wonder if you're just longing for a bye-gone era.---"If only some responsible clubowners would step up to the plate, it could be just like it USED to be...."

 

I don't have any illusions that it'll be like it used to be. The baby boomers are old now and don't go out much, and the generations after them are fewer in number and have more entertainment choices. I get that. But there are still certain practices on both the business end and the musical end which, if they are not being followed, are inevitably going to lead to failure. Stupid and lazy is still stupid and lazy, and all I've done here is call out the stupid and lazy. Not being stupid or lazy doesn't guarantee that you'll succeed, but at least you haven't guaranteed yourself failure.

 

Is it really reasonable to expect the old paradigm of "musicians standing on stage playing songs in a 4/5 piece band" to be enough in 2011 and beyond? EVERYTHING else has changed so much in the last few decades but live music is largely the same as it has always been. Isn't it almost like asking people to get excited about your new TV show and then giving it to them on a black-and-white cathode ray tube set?

 

Not really (and actually, a lot of people might think the novelty of watching something on an old set like that was cool ). It depends on what you're trying to achieve of course, but I've seen plenty of bands in the past decade that excite people by just getting up on a stage with instruments and rocking the hell out of a show. Music is music - it's been ingrained in our psyches for as long as we've been human and it can still move people. But getting people to remember how much it can move them, and how profoundly, when they're subjected to an endless supply of people who don't really give a {censored} (whether it's Joe Dad Band or kids recording something in GarageBand and posting it on the Internet and spamming everyone to listen to their crappy creation)... that can be tough. I don't think it's hard for a good band to really get people going (even without the lightshow) once people are in the room - getting them into the room in the first place is another story. They've been burned too many times.

[TheRinger]

This is the crux of the point. The list of "must haves" is a very short list. And neither lights nor sound system in on it. HOWEVER, generally speaking, bands that make the investment in themselves to get a nice light show and sound system are generally better bands. Are they better because they have the lights, absolutely not. They are better because they pay attention to the details and they care, and investing in lights and sound IS a detail that can differentiate you from other bands.....

 

 

Perfect:thu:

[Lee Knight]

"Is it really reasonable to expect the old paradigm of "musicians standing on stage playing songs in a 4/5 piece band" to be enough"

 

Ever see a 14 year old watch primo Zeppelin footage? Their jaw melts to the floor and its as if a video game never existed. The histrionics are a result of the music and not some misguided intent to entertain. I'm all for entertainment, but the best stuff is born out of a deeper place first. It's a shame when creators of music today forget that and just don a silly hat and glasses. Or a white studded belt, low rise black jeans and a pre Beiber forehead doo while spinning their bass around their shoulders like a hulahoop. That's entertainment folks!

[Agitator]

 

"Is it really reasonable to expect the old paradigm of "musicians standing on stage playing songs in a 4/5 piece band" to be enough" Ever see a 14 year old watch primo Zeppelin footage? Their jaw melts to the floor and its as if a video game never existed. The histrionics are a result of the music and not some misguided intent to entertain. I'm all for entertainment, but the best stuff is born out of a deeper place first. It's a shame when creators of music today forget that and just don a silly hat and glasses. Or a white studded belt, low rise black jeans and a pre Beiber forehead doo.

 

 

Because the guys in Led Zeppelin never wore funny clothes? I'm not sure what your point is. Page and Plant did more than just "stand onstage and play" even if they weren't doing synchronized dance steps. They certainly seemed conscious of "putting on a show" (as opposed to, say, the Grateful Dead) and certainly dressed the part.

[BATCAT]

IIs it really reasonable to expect the old paradigm of "musicians standing on stage playing songs in a 4/5 piece band" to be enough in 2011 and beyond?

I don't know, lots of people still pay money to see exactly that, and have a great time.

I've read some very entertaining books lately, the presentation of which is pretty much the same as a few hundred years ago: a printed page. It's the content that matters.

I'm not saying it's not right for many bands to "put on a show", whatever that means in a given context, or to try to incorporate newer technology and media into what they do. But I think it's awfully premature to start planning a funeral for a regular band format just because (in a time of economic turmoil) the music scene is hurting in some cities.

There really isn't a lack of people who want to see "musicians standing on stage playing songs in a 4/5 piece band" here, that's for sure.

[Lee Knight]

Because the guys in Led Zeppelin never wore funny clothes? I'm not sure what your point is. Page and Plant did more than just "stand onstage and play" even if they weren't doing synchronized dance steps. They certainly seemed conscious of "putting on a show" (as opposed to, say, the Grateful Dead) and certainly dressed the part.

 

 

They sure did wear funny clothes. And I love them for it. But if you read my post closely, you'll see that I was making the point that their histrionics were born out of the music. And that brings a gravity and realness to the entertainment. Page pointing his bow at the audience hardly was necessary. But it was dictated by his very simple but cool use of echo, guitar and bow. It brought us into the music. Not into his ego.

[Lee Flier]

"Is it really reasonable to expect the old paradigm of "musicians standing on stage playing songs in a 4/5 piece band" to be enough" Ever see a 14 year old watch primo Zeppelin footage? Their jaw melts to the floor and its as if a video game never existed. The histrionics are a result of the music and not some misguided intent to entertain. I'm all for entertainment, but the best stuff is born out of a deeper place first. It's a shame when creators of music today forget that and just don a silly hat and glasses. Or a white studded belt, low rise black jeans and a pre Beiber forehead doo while spinning their bass around their shoulders like a hulahoop. That's entertainment folks!

 

:thu:

[Agitator]

 

They sure did wear funny clothes. And I love them for it. But if you read my post closely, you'll see that I was making the point that their histrionics were born out of the music. And that brings a gravity and realness to the entertainment. Page pointing his bow at the audience hardly was necessary. But it was dictated by his very simple but cool use of echo, guitar and bow. It brought us into the music. Not into his ego.

 

To each his own. I find their onstage schtick to be over-the-top (e.g. the violin bow) and considered it a major turnoff as a wannabe-punk teen. I'm not sure how it's supposed to bring a 'gravity' to the performance and I find it to be very much in the "look how amazing I am" school of strutting and preening.

 

I mean, we're getting into issues of personal taste here (surprise) but I don't think you make a serious argument that their schtick is more "meaningful" or "born out of the music" by any objective measure than some party band who puts straw hats on to play "Hawaii Five-O". It's all laughably fake if you're a jazz musician, and I'm sure it all seems laughably amateurish and sloppy if you're Jackie Wilson or Michael Jackson.

[wheresgrant3]

Me either. That's not how it works. How it works is they get a different "Joe" in every night who can bring in a bunch of their buddies for one night. They know it'll never happen again, so Joe never gets another gig. But Bob does, who sucks just as much as Joe, and has a different set of buddies who'll come and watch him play rockstar for a night. In a large metropolitan area, there's an endless supply of Joes and Bobs, so this actually works for awhile until the rent goes up or something of that nature. We've had that happen too, but it's usually been too little too late. I can't tell you how many times we've played the last week that a bar stays open. Like they suddenly have a revelation that hey, if they hire a good band and pay them decently, maybe people will start coming back! But by that time they're already deep in the hole and if things don't turn around in a few weeks (which rarely happens), they close. Or stop having bands altogether.

I'm in a rural/semi suburban market. The average 'joe' commutes more than an hour to work each day which limits the number of and frequency that 'hobby' form and gig. And we have the same problem in my market with bars experiencing a 'live entertainment death spiral'. But here is catch. The average to below average band that is only making $250-300 and brings family and friends is still more profitable than the better band than barely draws 10 people. I can point to several good bands in my market that are beyond the 'dad' level (in that $600-800 range) that believe if they play, people will come to see them. They don't market aside from spamming Facebook, they don't really work to connect with that audience either. From the bar owner's perspective if he hires two band, one that sorta sucks for $300 and one established for $800 amd they both play to 50 people and ring up $2000 at the bar, which band is more profitable. As I said earlier good does not = popular. Both take alot of work and effort on the part of the band to achieve. I think a band that over charges a venue based on their 'perceived' value does just as much harm or even more to a struggling bar or club than a 'hobby band' that drives out some patrons.

I have a friend in a band that has been struggling since they started. From a musicianship standpoint they have had nothing but improvements. They are tight, have some crafty medleys and over all sound very good. Their weak spots are: they lack an identifiable front person, they copy too much material from established bands, and they really don't engage the audience off stage or on. When they break between their sets it's immediate to their girlfriends or to their cars. Since they are based in another market (they travel about an hour to get here) they have virtually no following after 2 years of playing in the area. We were talking the other day about another room they were about to lose and he lamented that he had to drop pay in their last gig by more than $600. 12 people showed. I asked him why did he set their rate at $1200 and fill the barowner with alot of hype, if they didn't have a following to support it and didn't charge more than $800 in their home market. He chalked it up to the extra travel and merely the opportunity to 'upcharge' because they were from out of the area. He then added that he didn't understand why his band couldn't develop a following in the area since he sees pics of our band in crowded bars all the time. He then added "And we're really good ..." referring to his own band. And, they are. They are just not 'popular' enough to charge $1200 based on their draw.

Again... good has nothing to do with it.

[Lee Flier]

To each his own. I find their onstage schtick to be over-the-top (e.g. the violin bow) and considered it a major turnoff as a wannabe-punk teen. I'm not sure how it's supposed to bring a 'gravity' to the performance and I find it to be very much in the "look how amazing I am" school of strutting and preening.

 

I did too actually. But I think the point was that it doesn't matter because there was musical substance behind it. It took me awhile to get into them as a teen because the presentation was a turnoff, but I think that I was in the minority in the 70s. In any case, I eventually figured out that there was something great underneath the schtick. But they still had schtick for people who are all into schtick - which is a LOT of people.

[BATCAT]

A hundred guys driving around in kiddie cars can't beat this:

[video=youtube;B-HBqwFf8mk]

[lsits]

I've been following the music stands, dad bands, attire threads. Here's my two cents:

 

My goal is to play live in front of people. To that end, I'll use whatever is at my disposal. I never wear shorts on stage. (you wouldn't want to see my chicken legs anyway). One time I wore a sleeveless t-shirt. Someone snapped a picture, and needless to say I'll never do that again. My usual attire is either a black short or long sleeved t-shirt, black jeans, and all-black chucks. When I set up I'm usually wearing blue jeans and a t-shirt but I change into my stage clothes before we start. I think it's important to take some time before you go on to get into the "rock star" mindset.

 

I also invested in a modest light system quite a few years ago. Just eight par-56 incandecents and a foot controller. I use six for backlighting and two for frontlighting. I can program eight different scenes into the foot controller. Since I'm the drummer, I pick a scene at the beginning of a song and keep it that way till the next. Like I said, not too high tech, but still better than 90% of the bands who play the places we play. Most bands idea of a "light show" is a DJ light or a set of lights set on random flashing mode.

 

Nothing is more boring than having a band who just stands there while playing. It makes me think that there is somewhere else they'd rather be. If you're playing in front of people you have to make it seem like it's the center of the universe and that it's THE place to be.

 

Of course you have to know the music and especially the arrangements backwards and forwards. That goes without saying.