Band Name

Nola

Nola

Well-known member
Hey guys.

I might start playing live, and I have a question about band names.
Say you have some immature/adolescent songs about like warts, constipation, pubes, sex, and then you also write mature songs about love and feelings. Do you think that should be two separate band names, or can you do it all under one band?

I want to have one band and write all the eclectic styles I enjoy listening to and writing about, but if I'm going to play live I wonder how that would go down with an audience if you go from singing about love to singing about constipation. Also, some of the stuff is very upbeat and almost like punk, and then other is somber.

Do you think I should separate the immature stuff into one band, and then mature stuff into another band.... or just F it?


Thanks.
 
Robus said:
I think you should do it all. Call it Nola's Mini Moods.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Robus.

When you say do it all you mean all under one name?

That's what I want to do, tbh, but I just wonder if a listener can deal with a set that's going all over the place. I know musically they can because even bands like Led Zeppelin have Black Dog which is like super hard rock and then Babe I'm going to Leave You, which is chill and bluesy. So that part is fine. But the immature/mature stuff is more the concern.

I guess that's where showmanship comes into play and I can just say something like "okay this one is a bit different it's not about love, it's about pubes...so hmm..maybe it's not that different after all."
 
My 'Boogeymen' project has comedy/parody as well as super serious stuff. I/we don't play out though.

When I did play locally many years ago our set included some funny songs, as well as serious material. We were not a smash success. Can't say if that was it or that we just sucked.
 
I have historically split my "serious" songs and my "goofy" songs into different projects. Eventually, the serious project more-or-less shriveled and was abandoned. (I've occasionally thought of restarting it as an acoustic project, but haven't gotten around to it)

I guess it's a matter of if you can create a coherent set out of both types of material. If the tone changes too much, people won't like your live shows, and your albums may not flow correctly. But if you can coherently transition between the two, it might work.

Examples of both techniques: most pop-punk bands from the 90s (blink 182, Green Day, etc.) would have albums that included ridiculous, goofy songs as well as thoughtful, introspective ones. But the sonic tone was always similar.
The punk band Treephort has a side project where the vocalist plays acoustic and slower. He does some of the same songs, but in general it's a lot more subdued and less snarky. That one has a different name.
 
Thanks for your thoughtful answer, Steve.

What do you think of Beck who has totally different sonic characteristics from song to song yet one name? I've seen him go from rap to delta blues and somehow it works. I'm wondering if it's because his name "Beck" doesn't really imply anything. I'm wondering if the more your band name implies a certain sound or style, the less you can comfortably deviate from it. I dunno.
 
Nola said:
What do you think of Beck who has totally different sonic characteristics from song to song yet one name? I've seen him go from rap to delta blues and somehow it works. I'm wondering if it's because his name "Beck" doesn't really imply anything. I'm wondering if the more your band name implies a certain sound or style, the less you can comfortably deviate from it. I dunno.
Click to expand...

Beck is his own thing. He's a very clever, talented musician and his gift is being able to do exactly as you describe. In some ways I see him as a modern pop version of Frank Zappa. There's only a handful of rock musicians who've been able to pull that sort of thing off and feed themselves.
 
1) Who do you expect to be in the audience?
2) Where are you going to play?

I think if you do a little research you'll find that your 'immature' songs will not attract the same people as your other stuff. Do you think the people who go to Weird AL shows and laugh at his parodies woudl stick around dreamy-eyed if he did a set of sloppy love songs?
 
Yeah, MJB sort of has it. You can use the same name for both types of song if you expect the same audience to like them.
Beck gets away with it because weird and experimental covers a pretty broad range. Once you have a reputation as that kind of musician, you can play pretty much anything. (Although, if he did an album of only twee pop songs, folks might get mad)
 
VomitHatSteve said:
Yeah, MJB sort of has it. You can use the same name for both types of song if you expect the same audience to like them.
Beck gets away with it because weird and experimental covers a pretty broad range. Once you have a reputation as that kind of musician, you can play pretty much anything. (Although, if he did an album of only twee pop songs, folks might get mad)
Click to expand...

What do you think of Beck when he did Sea Change? That album is focused and mostly one style (slow and country-ish). So on an album like that, even with his reputation for being weird and experimental, would a punk song or funny song be out of place? I think so, right? That's probably why he put them all on one album. Then he did that more recent slow keyboard/atmospheric album and it's all that one style. So it's more like he changes style album to album instead of song to song. Hm
 
When I think of Beck I think of an artist who works pretty hard at appearing unconcerned about other artsts' norms, and that aesthetic informs his sound, repertoire, and sequencing decisions.
 
In the end, it doesn't really matter all that much what you call yourself.

After all, cheesy names like "The Beatles" or "The Hollies" did not hold those groups back.

I think you should call your band "New Original Lyrical Art".
 
Nola said:
What do you think of Beck when he did Sea Change?
Click to expand...

I thought, "on second thought, I don't think I like Beck... I'm not gonna listen to this album." :D

He probably could have gotten away with a funny or punk song, but he would have needed the self-awareness to sequence and master it correctly.
If your album is all introspective and sad, you can get away with one goofy song right at the end pretty easily. A "secret track" or something to lighten the mood and cleanse the listener's palette.
Two goofy songs in a mostly serious album is a harder sell, but you can maybe treat it as sides, each with a palette cleanser.
Any more than that, and you no longer have a consistent theme in the album, and that inconsistency needs to become your theme.
 
The trick to doing that sort of thing as one band will be how you arrange the set list. IF there is a flow to the show, it can work.

However, one of the cool things about playing live is finding out what an audience responds to and what they don't. When you figure out which songs don't go over, you can just stop putting them in your set. Eventually the problem takes care of itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top