Members tim_7string Posted September 2, 2011 Members Share Posted September 2, 2011 I have seen a few trios around here (and I'm talking about trios with drummers). A lot of them like to extol the virtues of only three people (less egos, easier to get together for practices, higher share of money, etc.). For me, being in a trio has always been a compromise and often a severe one. I like singing while I'm playing guitar, but if the bassist isn't solid and 'busy' and the drummer is merely competent, it can sound a bit empty to my ears. Still, it's a nice idea. Last year, I had a trio and it was a lot of work, but I did make some good money. I have heard of some bands, on here and locally, talk about reducing down to a trio for bar gigs, due to the dismal pay (relatively speaking). Have you ever considered downsizing your band yourself (from a quartet or even a quintet down to a trio)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Consume Posted September 2, 2011 Members Share Posted September 2, 2011 To me, either a Trio, or a Trio+singer is the way to go. If I can pull it off, I prefer a trio. More space on stage, less gear to haul, and more money per band member.... and for me being in a cover band, that is the name of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rodclement Posted September 2, 2011 Members Share Posted September 2, 2011 I went DUO years ago for ease, pay, and overall bliss of not having to deal with many people's BS! Very easy to book in smaller venues, easy to learn new material, overall very satisfying! Rod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ggm1960 Posted September 2, 2011 Members Share Posted September 2, 2011 I've played in trios more than any other arrangment and I won't say I hate it but as a guitarist and singer a guy just really has to be on his toes........constantly. I like the new situation I'm in now where there are four of us and one guy is a very good singer. That's worth the pay split to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Crustee Posted September 2, 2011 Members Share Posted September 2, 2011 I'm in a trio, and it's the most fun I've had in a while. Gives me LOTS of room to stretch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jeff42 Posted September 2, 2011 Members Share Posted September 2, 2011 my trio allows the smaller bars to have some decent live entertainment. We are a semi-acoustic act with e-drums. Meaning: We are not a POWER TRIO playing super loud nor are we just your average acoustic act. we are somewhere in between. We started playing gigs in May & we are at the point where we increased our asking price and all the little local bars in my area are calling me I am not calling them. we have the choice right now where we want to play. If they don't meet our price or its not a place we want to play, we don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MusicalSchizo Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 We're a trio, and it's a blast. Totally worth giving it a shot if you can find the right players. It helps if they play "big" - covering a lot of ground. You don't have to play busy to play big, but you almost have to seem like more than one player at once. I kind of do bass + rhythm guitar sometimes, especially during guitar solos, and I hit as many familiar accents in the songs as possible because people's memories tend to be pretty good at filling in the gaps. And the three-way split makes it much more financially enjoyable...Brian V. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cherri Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 I'm enjoying the heck out of my current trio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gonzobassman Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 I went from a 6 piece band to a power trio with a singer (4-piece),and I love the new band!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tim_7string Posted September 3, 2011 Author Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 Great responses so far. Sounds like a lot of you appreciate the trio for its own merits, meaning you like playing in a trio regardless of the pay split. A friend of mine used to always try to put trios together with me and with others. He figured if we could find a halfway decent drummer, we were golden (he sang and played bass guitar). I guess there are various approaches to it. If the goal is to play a certain bar circuit that only pays a certain amount, then going three-piece seems to make the most financial sense. Actually, going solo does, but it's not really a band in that situation. But if the goal is to make the band itself something special, regardless of how many people are in that band, then it seems like the gigs will eventually take care of themselves. My approach last year was to form a three-piece to play dive bars for quick and dirty money. It did the job, but the longer I was in the band, the more I realized how limited we were with songs I wanted to do. It was fun to take horn parts, keyboard parts and dual guitar parts and rearrange them for the bassist and myself, but also challenging. Live, it always felt like something was missing, even though we would sometimes get compliments that people didn't realize we were only a trio when they heard us outside the bar, wedding dance, or other gigs. I am enjoying the options my current band has with the four of us: two lead singers, two strong harmony vocalists, two other backing vocalists, two guitars sometimes (including guitar harmonies), guitar and keyboards at other times, and finally, the visual of having a woman in the band (which has only increased our appeal). And the longer we are together, I can see down the road that we will be booked more frequently and for more money because we do sound really good together. I'm not sure if we'd be in a similar position if one of us was missing from the picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members New Trail Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 .... I like singing while I'm playing guitar, but if the bassist isn't solid and 'busy' and the drummer is merely competent, it can sound a bit empty to my ears.... I would take a bass player that locks in with the drummer over a 'busy' bass player any day. I've had it with lead bass players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tim_7string Posted September 3, 2011 Author Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 I would take a bass player that locks in with the drummer over a 'busy' bass player any day. I've had it with lead bass players. Good point. I am more of a Townshend-style rhythm player on guitar, so having an Entwistle-style bassist in the band actually works better for me, but I can see that being a problem with some guitarists. I personally prefer a bassist with taste, but one that can "bring it" when needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members New Trail Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 Good point. I am more of a Townshend-style rhythm player on guitar, so having an Entwistle-style bassist in the band actually works better for me, but I can see that being a problem with some guitarists. I personally prefer a bassist with taste, but one that can "bring it" when needed. I get your point, but I guess I tend to end up playing with bass players who "bring it" all the time and don't know about playing with taste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tim_7string Posted September 3, 2011 Author Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 I know what you mean. I have played with a few guys like that too, where they will play like that all the time, even when it's inappropriate (such as a sparse, slow ballad where they add some fast, busy runs....ugh!). In a case like that, I agree that a solid, simpler bassist would be preferable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SeniorBlues Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 I've solved the bass player problem . . . when he leaves, don't replace him. Seriously, a lot of this has to do with your repertoire. I realize the standard guitar, bass, drums format works well, but if you're in a position to put together something different . . . . well, hopefully people will appreciate your unique sound and capabilities. I think we have a competitive advantage that will help us get gigs in the short term, if not a reasonable amount of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members chadd Posted September 4, 2011 Members Share Posted September 4, 2011 Most trios do it for the wrong reasons; ego issues or a bigger split. Very few do it because it makes the music better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Chicken Monkey Posted September 4, 2011 Members Share Posted September 4, 2011 IME, you get paid more in a trio because you're working harder. You're playing more complex stuff (and often singing at the same time), you're practicing to make sure your transitions, etc., are hog tight, you're rearranging songs to make them work in the trio format, etc. I usually play in trios, but it's not for the money--it's because it's easier to schedule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Thy God Posted September 4, 2011 Members Share Posted September 4, 2011 I'm far too fond of the two-guitar format to ever do a trio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TIMKEYS Posted September 6, 2011 Members Share Posted September 6, 2011 The organization plays in every format from a solo act to a duo, trio, quartet and full five piece band. the decision to go in lighter is more of what people have going on in their real life rather than the money splits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted September 6, 2011 Members Share Posted September 6, 2011 Since your question is an economic one, then you simply have to do the math: If you can get the same gigs for the same money with a 3-piece as you would with a 4-piece than it obviously makes sense. Some have told stories, however, of rooms that won't hire trios. In that case...obviously it doesn't. Another consideration might be the future of the band. If your goal is to go beyond the small bar gigs, it would be hard to do that with only a 3 piece. But if that's not your goal, and you like the sound of your band with 3 pieces and make the same money...then why not? Weren't you in a trio last year? You should know the ins and outs of it by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TrickyBoy Posted September 6, 2011 Members Share Posted September 6, 2011 It's an interesting question that I wrestle with... Should we add a 5th member? Right now we're a 4-piece with a dedicated lead singer, so from an instrumentation standpoint, we're a trio. We're ding well, making decent money, but we're definitely far from the "ceiling". Herein lies the argument. On one side: Making $1,000 and splitting it 4 ways sounds a lot better than splitting it 5 ways. And the other:Adding a 5th member would allow us to sound better, therefore allowing us to increase out rate... I lean towards the second option being more in line with the truth, but, it's hard to say definitively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tim_7string Posted September 6, 2011 Author Members Share Posted September 6, 2011 Another consideration might be the future of the band. If your goal is to go beyond the small bar gigs, it would be hard to do that with only a 3 piece. But if that's not your goal, and you like the sound of your band with 3 pieces and make the same money...then why not? Weren't you in a trio last year? You should know the ins and outs of it by now. I have been in several trios over the years. In every case, something was lacking. I'd either find a great drummer and a so-so (or {censored}ty) bass player or a damn good singing bassist and an okay drummer. It was almost as if it just wasn't possible to find three very proficient members. Even if our guitarist in my band were to bow out, the drummer is great, but can't sing, harmony or lead, only occasional backing parts. And my preference has always been for four instruments rather than three anyway. I just like the sound of it better and it is less stress for me. I don't mind doing a lot of work in a band, but when it starts feeling like I'm doing 60% of it? Yeah, that's a bummer. Anyway, I don't have any immediate plans to go three-piece. I'd rather build the band the way it is and move on from there. I was just curious and this topic stemmed from conversations I had with local trios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TIMKEYS Posted September 6, 2011 Members Share Posted September 6, 2011 It's an interesting question that I wrestle with... Should we add a 5th member? Right now we're a 4-piece with a dedicated lead singer, so from an instrumentation standpoint, we're a trio. We're ding well, making decent money, but we're definitely far from the "ceiling". Herein lies the argument. On one side:Making $1,000 and splitting it 4 ways sounds a lot better than splitting it 5 ways.And the other:Adding a 5th member would allow us to sound better, therefore allowing us to increase out rate...I lean towards the second option being more in line with the truth, but, it's hard to say definitively. I would find a keyboard player that can sing harmony back up. That opens up more options and it will thicken up your mix. right now you are limited on material due to your three piece format. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted September 6, 2011 Members Share Posted September 6, 2011 I lean towards the second option being more in line with the truth, but, it's hard to say definitively. I hear ya. We just added a sixth member for the same reasons: betting that both because we'll sound better and look bigger/better we'll be able to more-than-pay for the extra split with an increased fee. Time will tell. I should have a definative answer by the end of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TrickyBoy Posted September 6, 2011 Members Share Posted September 6, 2011 I would find a keyboard player that can sing harmony back up. That opens up more options and it will thicken up your mix. right now you are limited on material due to your three piece format. That would be ideal. Unfortunately, these guys don't seem to just fall of trees... :poke: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.