Moderators BATCAT Posted September 7, 2011 Moderators Share Posted September 7, 2011 Here Nick Cave "owning it" at almost 60. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted September 7, 2011 Members Share Posted September 7, 2011 Is that a music stand I see starting at about 0:18? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators BATCAT Posted September 7, 2011 Moderators Share Posted September 7, 2011 Is that a music stand I see starting at about 0:18? Ha, good catch. If he's using it for lyrics, he's being damn sneaky about it. The placement is very discreet too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SpaceNorman Posted September 7, 2011 Members Share Posted September 7, 2011 Ha, good catch. If he's using it for lyrics, he's being damn sneaky about it. The placement is very discreet too. How sneaky of him to put it right next to his mic stand !!!! I think I even heard the audience gasp when the lights came up and they saw the dreaded music stand on stage!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators BATCAT Posted September 7, 2011 Moderators Share Posted September 7, 2011 How sneaky of him to put it right next to his mic stand !!!! I think I even heard the audience gasp when the lights came up and they saw the dreaded music stand on stage!!!! Heh. In all seriousness, though it looks like it's pretty far to the side to the side and angled, at about the height of the keyboard stand, so it kind of blends into it. Look at around 0:30- it's almost invisible from the front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted September 7, 2011 Members Share Posted September 7, 2011 STILL looks dumb. Is that mic stand on stage the WORST thing I've ever seen a band do? Of course not. Is anyone going to walk out? no. Would the stage and the band look better without it? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dingoist Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 That's the great thing about being young. You can wear almost ANYTHING and make it rock. Once you get much past 40 and and you just start looking like "creepy old dude" with the moccasins and such. So yeah, I think older guys DEFINATELY need to "class things up" a bit more. Even if it's to the point of being a bit cheezy. (Hey, you're old. People EXPECT you to look cheezy) Younger guys have MUCH more leeway with what looks good and right on stage.I retired my leather jeans shortly after I entered my 30s and got a desk job. I just couldn't pull it off any more... I no longer owned it I'm generally a collered shirt, nice jeans kind of guy, though I pull out my good CK suit for specific events. If I'm just playing at the pub, jeans is fine though.When I was much younger and potentially or delusion-ally hipper, I had started an acoustic duo thingy, mostly strange/silliness, but my getup was going to be tight orange spandex pants, topless with "Ozzy Rulz" written on my chest with lipstick. We didn't get to the first gig before disbanding the duo due to lack of everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 When I was much younger and potentially or delusion-ally hipper, I had started an acoustic duo thingy, mostly strange/silliness, but my getup was going to be tight orange spandex pants, topless with "Ozzy Rulz" written on my chest with lipstick. We didn't get to the first gig before disbanding the duo due to lack of everything. Too bad. That's something that DEFINATELY needed a photo record.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TIMKEYS Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 They owned the look for sure ,, they also owned those two notes.... they were beating. Whoof whoof Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarguy19 Posted September 8, 2011 Author Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 STILL looks dumb. Is that mic stand on stage the WORST thing I've ever seen a band do? Of course not. Is anyone going to walk out? no. Would the stage and the band look better without it? Yes. F'n mic stands!!! Jeez! We have to hold a mic while playing guitar too now!!!??? How many hands you think I got??? :poke:I guess it's Justin Timberlake headsets for all...that'll complete the look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members germs_2 Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 shorts are okay for an outside gig during the day. that's about it. tshirts are fine, generally speaking. so long as they're what's currently in style. jeans too. sandals...not really, unless you're in a hippie jam band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lsits Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 F'n mic stands!!! Jeez! We have to hold a mic while playing guitar too now!!!??? How many hands you think I got??? :poke: Bob Seger was ahead of the curve: r2aBOTNGWMY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 tshirts are fine, generally speaking. . Off-topic somewhat but: does anybody else find it odd that people will PAY MONEY to buy a shirt with a brand name/logo on it and wear it? Essentially PAYING MONEY to advertise FOR Fender, Harley Davidson, Hard Rock Cafe etc? People will pay three-four times as much for the shirt just for the opportunity to advertise FOR somebody else.... Nice racket! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators BATCAT Posted September 8, 2011 Moderators Share Posted September 8, 2011 Off-topic somewhat but: does anybody else find it odd that people will PAY MONEY to buy a shirt with a brand name/logo on it and wear it? Essentially PAYING MONEY to advertise FOR Fender, Harley Davidson, Hard Rock Cafe etc? People will pay three-four times as much for the shirt just for the opportunity to advertise FOR somebody else.... Oh man, don't even get me started on this one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Pine Apple Slim Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 Some good points in this thread. Agree its something you have tow own. And 50 somethings just cant own younger guys or teenagers look.Dark semi casual is much easier to look good and your age. Its kinda a general default.If I was gonna do something different, for a casual alt/country americana type thing(certainly not a formal affair) I can get away with:If I wore a T with something printed on it, would need to be appro or comedic: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarguy19 Posted September 8, 2011 Author Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 Off-topic somewhat but: does anybody else find it odd that people will PAY MONEY to buy a shirt with a brand name/logo on it and wear it? Essentially PAYING MONEY to advertise FOR Fender, Harley Davidson, Hard Rock Cafe etc? People will pay three-four times as much for the shirt just for the opportunity to advertise FOR somebody else.... Nice racket! Yeah...but I don't think it's crazy to wear a shirt that has something you like on it either...brand name or otherwise. If you like it wear it. No biggie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tlbonehead Posted September 9, 2011 Members Share Posted September 9, 2011 .tshirts are fine, generally speaking. so long as they're what's currently in style. jeans too.sandals...not really, unless you're in a hippie jam band.in your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted September 9, 2011 Moderators Share Posted September 9, 2011 Nothing says rock like lederhosen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Agitator Posted September 9, 2011 Members Share Posted September 9, 2011 Nothing says rock like lederhosen. Only if you really sell them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted September 9, 2011 Members Share Posted September 9, 2011 Double post... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted September 9, 2011 Members Share Posted September 9, 2011 Well there's always this... let Dave Grohl tell you how to succeed in the music biz...http://teamcoco.com/video/dave-grohl-taylor-hawkins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TIMKEYS Posted September 9, 2011 Members Share Posted September 9, 2011 Off-topic somewhat but:does anybody else find it odd that people will PAY MONEY to buy a shirt with a brand name/logo on it and wear it? Essentially PAYING MONEY to advertise FOR Fender, Harley Davidson, Hard Rock Cafe etc? People will pay three-four times as much for the shirt just for the opportunity to advertise FOR somebody else....Nice racket! yup t shirts are a nice racket. it would be nice to sell a couple hundred thousand of them and make a buck a piece and never have to get your hands dirty. I have a nice harley t shirt collection. We would pick them up as we rode around the country. I never bought one from a place that I didnt ride the bike to. Now that I am with out of a bike I wear them around the house and such. I got my moneys worth. I had harley riding clothes ande now they are memories that will die a proper death as i get paint and crap on them from screwing around with boats. I think we need to focus more on selling band and venue stuff and CDs. We need to pick up the pace on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted September 9, 2011 Moderators Share Posted September 9, 2011 I have a t-shirt with the Blue Note Record Label. I'm OK with that logo. Not so OK with Ed Hardy/Von Dutch, et al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Alex_SF Posted September 9, 2011 Members Share Posted September 9, 2011 does anybody else find it odd that people will PAY MONEY to buy a shirt with a brand name/logo on it and wear it? Essentially PAYING MONEY to advertise FOR Fender, Harley Davidson, Hard Rock Cafe etc? People will pay three-four times as much for the shirt just for the opportunity to advertise FOR somebody else.... Not really. People pay money for all kinds of clothing or accessories that show their affinity or affiliation with something they like. I find it no more odd than the phenomenon of people buying clothes with a sports team logo on them, or even actual sports jerseys with somebody's name and jersey number on them. Or band name T-shirts. Paul Fussell, in his book Class, discussed how the different American social classes exhibited similar behavior, just manifested in different ways (e.g. as you move from prole up to middle and upper-middle class, the BUDWEISER shirt is replaced by a shirt with a small, more understated alligator sewn on the chest): There are psychological reasons why proles feel a need to wear legible clothing, and they are more touching than ridiculous. By wearing a garment reading SPORTS ILLUSTRATED or GATORADE or LESTER LANIN, the prole associates himself with an enterprise the world judges successful, and thus, for the moment, he achieves some importance. This is the reason why, at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway each May, you can see grown men walking around proud to wear silly-looking caps so long as they say GOODYEAR or VALVOLINE. Brand names today possess a totemistic power to confer distinction on those who wear them. By donning legible clothing you fuse your private identity with external commercial success, redeeming your insignificance and becoming, for the moment, somebody. For $27 you can send in to a post-office box in Holiday, Florida, and get a nylon jacket in blue, white, and orange that says, on the front, UNION 76. There are sizes for kids and ladies too. Just the thing for the picnic. And this need is not the proles' alone. Witness the T-shirts and carryalls stamped with the logo of The New York Review of Books, which convey the point "I read hard books," or printed with portraits of Mozart and Haydn and Beethoven, which assure the world, "I am civilized." The gold-plated blazer buttons displaying university seals affected by the middle class likewise identify the wearer with impressive brand names like the University of Indiana and Louisiana State. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SeniorBlues Posted September 9, 2011 Members Share Posted September 9, 2011 Not really. People pay money for all kinds of clothing or accessories that show their affinity or affiliation with something they like. I find it no more odd than the phenomenon of people buying clothes with a sports team logo on them, or even actual sports jerseys with somebody's name and jersey number on them.Paul Fussell, in his book Class, discussed how the different American social classes exhibited similar behavior, just manifested in different ways (e.g. as you move from prole up to middle and upper-middle class, the BUDWEISER shirt is replaced by a shirt with a small, more understated alligator sewn on the chest): . . . but that doesn't alter the fact that in all your examples, they serve as a distraction. All the focus should be on your brand - not a team, beer, or clothing mfg - regardless of how prominent or subtle. I've read a lot in this thread about what "you" wear, without any apparent consideration of what the rest of the band is wearing A bass player once admitted to me that he thought he was unattractive, and that the loud patterns and colors he wore were an intentional distraction. From a photographer's point of view, if I'm doing a group promo shot, I want all the viewers' attention on your eyes. Pros advise each other to get paid in advance (before seeing the proofs) if everybody shows up wearing a mish mash of outfits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.