Gig question...

B

Brahmb

New member
Alright... I'm asking this of people out there who are gigging on a regular basis. Is anybody doing this for a living with just a keyboard? Or perhaps with a gutiar player and drummer and another vocalist? I guess I'm just wondering if anybody goes out, uses all the sampling stuff, and has anybody tell them they're just a karaoke machine. I mean... where's the talent in pushing a button?

I played a gig one week at a hotel, and most of the patrons were good with my piano and vocal music, but when I tried to pick up the tempo a bit by running midi through the keyboard... some of the patrons weren't impressed (of course this was over 10 years ago). How do people feel about hearing all these sounds from these monster machines? I mean... we all think they're great, but would YOU go to see a keyboard playing the drums? Or the guitar?

Please help me out with your opinion. I'm getting the Yamaha Motif ES regardless, because I definitely will use it at school with the kids. But can I gig with it for more than piano sounds? I know it's capable, but is it palatable?

Thanks. Brahmb.
 
Ps

I guess you can give me your opinion as an audience member, even if you don't gig... Shoulda thought about that...
 
This is a great topic for a thread, thanks for bringing this subject up. There's a lot to it and I kind of don't know where to start.

I do a lot of gigging in orchestra pits. Most of the time I am playing synth and creating sounds like strings, woodwinds, brass, piano, keyboards/organs, and exotic percussion sounds. On the rare occasion I even get to play a real piano!

Anyway, in my usual situation the audience can't see me. So it's not like they see a guy playing a keyboard and guitar sounds are coming out. It actually helps the illusion a lot if you *aren't* seen. Sort of like when a magician hides how he does the trick.

However, the thing that happens all the time in orchestra pits now is that almost invariably someone will peek over the pit and say "oh, there's people down here? I thought it was all on tape". AAAAARGH! I hate that.

But I think when you are in full view of an audience it's a little bit different. Also, where you play can make a difference too. Like in a bar or club people might feel more free to heckle or to just let rip with whatever they have to say. A couple drinks (or more) can do that to people.

As a music guy myself I can say that when in an audience I appreciate the skill of a guy who's doing the one man band thing. But on some level, it does look like cheating, and probably more so to someone not knowing what goes into making it happen. nothing beats a good band with a few good musicians playing well together. I think if you have a drummer, bassist, and singer, you can get away with a *lot* more in terms of playing different sounds on the keyboard. Solo, it's pretty rough. You get the drum machine going, and it's kind of like tape right there.

A lot of audience members also don't understand that the producer of the event, whether it simply be a bar or a theatrical show, only wants to spend a certain amount of money. If that's only enough for one person, they still want a "band" sound, so part of the gig is giving them that even if you'd just prefer to play the gig on a piano. But you're the one sitting there, so it's "shoot the messenger".
 
Pit band

This is one of the reasons I bring it up. As a music teacher, the question gets even tougher. I just did Annie with our school, and the pit was good, but not nearly as full as it should be. We are a school of about 180 students K-12 (of which, about 60 were in the show), and even with 3 community members in the pit, we didn't get as full a sound as I wanted. I would've loved to replace the violin player too (she did great during day rehearsals, but got more out of tune as they day wore on... I think sun-downing was a factor). However, even in this situation, the community would be split in their opinion on the matter. Half the people wouldn't care who or what played, as long as it sounded good. The other half are purists and would insist on live music for live presentations. The next half (yes I realize I have three halves here) wouldn't be happy no matter what. Unfortunately, I have to include this third half because they're the administration...

Anyway. I have used both live music and pre-recorded music in my concerts (at least all the pre-recorded is my own). People have the same mixed reaction. I want to branch out into playing at bars and restaurants, but not as an attraction as much as background music. Since there is such a dichotomy, I thought I'd ask opinions here.

Thanks in advance to all replies.
 
Brahmb said:
The next half (yes I realize I have three halves here) wouldn't be happy no matter what. Unfortunately, I have to include this third half because they're the administration...
Click to expand...
And these are supposed to be the people elected to help support the children of your community?!?!? I guess some people just walk around life with a stick up their....

Onto your question. Obviously a good deal of this has to be in context to the material being performed (i.e. Industrial, techno, etc. have made a good deal of their success on this very debate, so I'll stick to more traditional material). I personally like to see a "Full" band. The "Real Deal". I of course understand too, that there are times when sequenced/sampled material is obviously the way to go, as a matter of practicallity (i.e. a song features heavy tolling bell samples...You can't exactly cut Big-Ben out of the tower and bring it to the local pub right???).

Where I think it becomes unacceptable is when it is used to facilitate a performer indulging in his/her own laziness. If you can play the part, "PLAY" the part!!! If you can "almost" play the part, practice more!!!!

As far as me personally, as we write songs, I am always conscience of the fact I'll need to play it live. So I either write within those bounds, or I will simultaneously figure out an alternative but equally impressive live part as I do the Studio stuff, so as I'm not left at the last minute figuring out "How in the hell will I do that live???". Which to me is better for the fans, because they're gonna get a cool twist on something they're used to hearing if they come see the show, which I try and keep close enough to how they are accustomed to hearing it, as to not offend those that are Studio/Live purists (You know...The guy who will think it sucks if it ain't note for note as it was on a CD).

As far as I'm concerned if any bar came to me and said we can only afford half the band, I'd tell him to "Get Bent!!!".

This is only my 2 cents. I guess I'm 50/50 overall. Embrace technolgy to help you expand your horizons, but don't get lazy. We have it so much easier today than 30 years ago (or even 5 years for that matter). And those old-school guys (Ken Hensley, Keith Emerson, etc.), did things that would make most anybodys jaw drop. If a machine can lighten the work load that they had, it should permit you to acclompish even better performances (Or was all that knob, patch cord trickery really the key to a Legendary performance???).

And lastly, if the keyboard is to replace someone (i.e. drummer), I would say, do it only as long as you have too. Try to find a real drummer or whatever musician you need (Unless your sound is truly based around the synthetic), and as long as you have a viable realistic option to use the "Real".
 
Hello, (sorry for this long post , but this topic definitely pertains to me)
You bring up the neverending issue that our band has since we do not have a drummer.
It makes it really difficult for live situations because when recording, the programmed drums are mixed in the way that they sound good in the mix, but live is very difficult to match up correct volumes of the drums with with the other instruments.
Different drum tracks are louder than others and even when I try to match up volumes it never seems to be ok. It is really difficult because I am singing and playing guitar while also trying to deal with the drums. We run the drums through a Barbetta amp:http://www.barbetta.com/Live/Sona_32/sona_32.html
Which is an excellent amp, but the only thing is that the volume controls are on the back and they are extremely sensitive to the lightest touch of the controls (moving it a hair makes it much louder) which makes it hard to get the desired volume with ease.
I have tried having the drums put through the PA and having the soundguy adjust the volume which hasn't worked out too well since they are not familiar with our style and they often put it too loud and it is also difficult for us since the drum sounds are coming out of the PA speakers which are in front of us and feels seperate from what we are trying to perform as a connected whole.

One time a soundguy put the drums back at me in the floor monitors and all I heard was blaring drums to my face... and he didn't even know he was doing it... I had to tell him to lower them from the floor monitors. (that's when I said...ok never again!!! I don't want the soundguy to control the drum volume from the PA!)

Today we went to a rehearsal studio and it's always the same issue... the drums never sound consistent within each song, and they are making me crazy! We thought maybe it's because we are playing the drums too loud, so we tried keeping them low, but to no avail. Some songs sound great with them, but not all of them do.

Feeling helpless... options we came up with:
- Get a drummer of course, but it's hard to just find one...

- I was thinking that maybe the reason it isn't working out on some songs is because the drums that were programmed were made to try to emulate real drums. I think we need to use a drum sound that emphasized the fact (in a taseful waw) that we "DO NOT" have a drummer. Instead of trying to make a machine try to sound like a machine, let the machine sound like a machine.

So this is the current way that we are going to try to work this situation... make new backing drum tracks that sound electronic, but minimal to back us up, but have our live instruments and vocals to be the forefront.

Brahmb,
I'm also a teacher (grades k-5). I play the guitar and work with mostly the younger children. I sing songs to help develop their literacy skills (letter sounds, rhyming etc.) I travel to different classes (I don't have my own classroom). If I did I would like to add other instrumentation. I've brought a drum machine to some classes and hooked it up to a boombox, they like it a lot, especially the older ones for rap style. And then me with the acoustic guitar... it's an interesting mix.

We also have a chorus teacher who uses a roland arranger keyboard.
http://www.homestead.com/va7_roland/files/va76.htm
He adds different rhythms and used different sounds and it's done in realtime with this kind of keyboard (arpegiator really cool). I think it's excellent for what he's using it for. He has control over what it's doing while he's playing. If it was pre-recorded and played, he wouldn't be able to adjust to the children singing an extra chorus here or there. You should check one out.

evt
 
First let me qualify that my main axe is drum kit - and as a drummer, I was impacted by the whole MIDI thing very early in the process (lost gigs to drum machines and more importantly, lost session work to machines). So I learned how to program drum machines, and I learned how to play keyboards and sequence (if you can't beat em' --------)

That being said, I've worked in bands with no drums (as a keyboard player/guitarist) and I've worked in bands that supplemented the live performances with various sequences (still do). I even worked in a band that used cassette tapes (before MIDI was created). I've tried a solo act with sequences (didn't last long, I'm simply not a strong enough vocalist) and had a duo that used sequences (again the vocals were not strong enough).

On a personal level, I don't like sequencing with live performance - to me, the joy of humans inter-acting, even if that means changing the arrangement on the fly (including the occasional mistakes), is what making music is all about. Playing to a sequence simply sucks the life out of live performance.

However, I understand on a business/ecomonic level why sequencing is used in performance, so as a music professional, I can tolerate and even appreciate (to a degree) when it is done well.

As a member of the audiance (with perhaps a better "music education" than most), I will watch a sequenced performance for a while - in particular if the vocal harmonies are great or if there is still some quality live performance going on. However, my level of interest and appreciation certainly is compromised to some degree.
 
How about...

I think most everyone is along the same lines here. How about if I got some suggestions about cool keyboard acts to look into to get an idea? I'm familiar with most Billy Joel, Elton John, and other artists who transfer well to solos, but want to find something with a little more kick. I've been checking out Ben Folds and like some of his stuff, but I'm not sure how it would transfer to solo work....
 
Brahmb said:
I think most everyone is along the same lines here. How about if I got some suggestions about cool keyboard acts to look into to get an idea? I'm familiar with most Billy Joel, Elton John, and other artists who transfer well to solos, but want to find something with a little more kick. I've been checking out Ben Folds and like some of his stuff, but I'm not sure how it would transfer to solo work....
Click to expand...
Almost anything can be turned into to a solo piece. It doesn't have to translate exactly as it was written (Which is pretty much impossible if you are stripping down a song from ensemble to solo anyways). To me that is the best part about a solo, not exactly how close it is to the original sonically, but how it is interpreted. Ever hear a cover song, that you liked better than the original, because it was different???

Anyways, some keyboard acts to check out which have songs I think would be cool for solo:
Emerson, Lake and Palmer (or Powell)
Uriah Heep (Old Stuff)
Electric Light Orchestra
Eagles
Kansas
Creedence Clearwater Rivival
Grateful Dead
Fleetwood Mac
And why not Ozzy??? (Think "Mama I'm Comin' Home", all piano)

Most any hair band (White Lion, Europe, etc....I'm a closet hair fan :eek: )

And my new non-metal fav, Keane.
 
Keane

I just came across Keane the other night and liked their sound. I've always thought Eagles translated well to piano, but alot of people don't agree. Some of Diana Krall's remakes are awesome on the piano though (and better than the originals in many cases).
 
This is definately an interesting thread. I make some really strange music which involves a lot of strange sequenced stuff. But here is my perception for us "studio" artist.

1. Most electronic artists are a complete ball of everything, from composing, to playing, to recording, and mastering. We usually do it all from start to scratch vs most bands that just jam and then go to a studio for their recordings.

2. Here is my concept for my own music project. Once I complete my album, I should be able to make sufficient sales and build a fan base. After that people are going to demand live shows.

3. I don't want to be part of a band, but as an orchestra is to the conductor, I want to have a band who will assist me in covering the music. Basically they should be patrons of my music, who I can totally look up to for their technical abilities, yet the creativity is all up to me.

4. I will not only have a band but I have a few other tricks up my sleeve for entertaining the audience. As a matter of fact I could probably get away without a band.

Well whatever haha.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top