How do bands afford to tour?

[Lt. Bob]

Or you can join a cover band, be lame as hell, and make 200 bucks a night.

not around here you can't.
Back in Louisiana you could and I bet Texas has a pretty good cover music scene but Florida is a craphole for bands. Clubs wanna pay a band 400 bucks tops except for only a couple of bands.
So here you gotta be a lame cover person.

 

[chamelious]

Thanks for the in depth replys bob, they're a very interesting read!

 

[Greg_L]

not around here you can't.
Back in Louisiana you could and I bet Texas has a pretty good cover music scene but Florida is a craphole for bands. Clubs wanna pay a band 400 bucks tops except for only a couple of bands.
So here you gotta be a lame cover person.

Cover/tribute bands are the RAGE down here, and it's so fucking gay I'm thinking about going on a killing spree. There's literally 5 or 6 Alice in Chains tribute bands going on every night down here. Hell, the real band isn't worth a fuck, why do we need 5 copies of that shit? And worse, why the fuck do people want to hear them?

 

[moresound]

It's better to burn out than fade away .......

I just had to say that. For it's so true.

 

[chamelious]

I had a long post that got lost, heres a summary:

Live music: Familiarity>Originality

 

[Lt. Bob]

. Hell, the real band isn't worth a fuck, why do we need 5 copies of that shit? And worse, why the fuck do people want to hear them?

 

[bdenton]

I think we need to make a distinction between tribute bands and cover bands...

A tribute band tries to duplicate the "show" of one or two prominent bands, down to the musician's looks, stage costumes, and equipment, in addition to doing note-for-note renditions of these band's music.

A cover band is one that simply draws the majority of their repertoire from songs popularized by a variety of other artists. Their music may range from note-for-note copies of hit records to very loose interpretations (or total reinterpretations) of those songs.

One thing that often gets forgotten is that a great guitarist, singer, drummer, or whatever may be a lousy songwriter. Should these people who are great musicians / lousy songwriters be prohibited from playing in public and entertaining people?

I think not.

I'm not a big fan of tribute bands, but to each his own. However, I played in a lot of cover bands in the late 60's and early 70's. We had a lot of fun playing and made a few bucks, and the people who came to see us had a good time.

And keep in mind that bands that have sold 10 million records don't generally play in places like Bastrop, LA or Monticello, AR. Were it not for cover bands, people who live in small towns would never get any live entertainment.

So, I think those who knock cover bands aren't really justified in doing so.

If you can write great songs, good for you; go out and play them.

But if you aren't a great songwriter, or if you just need to make some money, don't dismiss cover bands out of hand.

And those of you who are too "whatever" to play in a cover band, pick up one of the earliest Beatles or Rolling Stones records. I believe you'll find those guys weren't too "whatever" to play covers...

 

[chamelious]

One thing that often gets forgotten is that a great guitarist, singer, drummer, or whatever may be a lousy songwriter.

If thats the case, then all you need to do to become a great guitarist is sit there and practise for hours a day.

I don't think i agree. I don't think technical ability has anything to do with how great a musician is. I personally don't like his music at all, but look at Hendrix. Horrificly bad technically speaking, but it worked on a lot of people.

Learning to play an instrument without writing music seems very odd to me, kind of like learning to cook then never cooking, learning to sew then sewing fuck all.

Covers/tribute bands are looked down upon by creative musicians because they cheapen what we do, by reducing what should be art, to a technical exercise.

Oh and by the way, all drummers are lousy songwriters.

 

[grimtraveller]

If thats the case, then all you need to do to become a great guitarist is sit there and practise for hours a day.

I don't think i agree. I don't think technical ability has anything to do with how great a musician is. I personally don't like his music at all, but look at Hendrix. Horrificly bad technically speaking, but it worked on a lot of people.

I don't see that as the point bdenton is making at all. He didn't seem to be saying that technical ability is this or that. Simply that there are and have been and will continue to be great musicians who simply can't write songs. Or don't write songs. By the same token many fantastic songwriters are very average and sometimes, below average instrumentalists. Their gifts lie somewhere other than dazzling technique or the ability to interpret on an instrument.

Learning to play an instrument without writing music seems very odd to me, kind of like learning to cook then never cooking, learning to sew then sewing fuck all.

I think this point would've carried more weight if you'd said it was like learning to cook, but never creating your own dishes or learning to sew but never making your own clothes. I've long said to people that if they can play an instrument or sing or read, they should be able to write songs. But of course, that's not true. In a way that view is actually devaluing the art of songwriting and I recognize that. I know seriously good instrumentalists, some are technically more than competent, some can improvize till the cows come home, some are excellent interpreters, some are solid groovers......but they can't write songs. You can argue that they could if they tried but you could say that about any person in any endeavour. I've done first aid and many refreshers. However, I couldn't perform surgery. Playing an instrument and writing songs of whatever shade and shape are definitely linked. But they are not one and the same.

Covers/tribute bands are looked down upon by creative musicians because they cheapen what we do, by reducing what should be art, to a technical exercise.

Unfair. For some, it is their art. It is their mode of expression. Neither is it fair to say it becomes merely a technical excercise. If your band does a cover, is it cheapening the original ? Is it simply a technical excercise because you didn't write it ? Nah.
And I say all that as one that is a fan of neither tribute or covers bands. I can't stand the idea. For me. But I have much respect for those that choose to do it because they are doing something that people enjoy being part of, for whatever reason. It's entertainment not political problem solving or UN diplomacy. It's not heavy 'let's save the world or your soul' stuff. The future of the world doesn't depend on it. It's almost being critical of people that would rather listen to covers and have a good sing~a~long than listen to a band whose stuff they've never heard before. I don't criticize them. I do the same with my albums. Many of us do. I mean, let's be honest, going to a bar that has an originals band, I can see that it's just too hard work to have to get into that band you've never heard or heard of and may never again after ! Far easier to listen to some fella in drag being Chaka Khan or listening to a band belt out songs one is familiar with.

Mind you, that's why I stay at home ! And why I'd be a pauper of a gigging musician.

 

[Lt. Bob]

Covers/tribute bands are looked down upon by creative musicians because they cheapen what we do, by reducing what should be art, to a technical exercise.

.

nah, that's crap. Not all cover bands just regurgitate the songs they play.
OK, tribute bands do which, I suppose, is why I have zero interest in tribute bands. But simply playing covers can be a different story.
I play covers and you'll see plenty of creativity when I play.

Further ...... bands that do their own music are really only doing covers of their own songs.
When I see original bands like say, Steely Dan, the last thing I wanna see is note for note reproductions of their songs. I wanna see where they're at musically at that moment ..... fortunately they, and many other bands, do that ..... playing their own songs wildly different.

I have the same freedom ..... to play covers however the hell I feel like it and I do.
I'm absolutely creative while playing them and there's no way you'd see me play and think there was no creativity going on.

Now that holds out the possibilty that people may not like what you're doing if it's very different but that's always the case with creating music which you are doing whether it's writing a song in its' entirety or stretching out on an improvisational solo.
If what you are doing is good, people will respond to it. Though I do songs often VERY different from the originals I have never had anyone come up and comment on that.
I do, however get lots of praise, both from casual listeners and good musicians. So I reject the premise that you have to slavishly play all covers just like the record.

 

[Lt. Bob]

stupid can't delete double post

 

[Supercreep]

Bit strong i woulda though, dilettantes?

The situation you described would be fine if you had nothing else to pay for besides the gas/tinned tuna, but what about rent, council tax, phone bill, water, electric, car tax, insurance, credit card bills, monthly repayments on the gear you need but cant afford to buy outright, etc? How do you handle all that stuff when you quit your day job?

Bob nailed it.

I don't mean to belittle your ability or passion. I mean it literally. When you're ready to cut the umbilical cord and play music for a living, you're going to be really, really, really poor. You don't need to keep a day job if music is your day job. In the meantime, if you can't afford something, you do without. This extends to health and dental care, birthdays, christmas, etc.

Most drummers get around this by having at least one girlfreind.

 

[Supercreep]

I suspect that to really "make it" you're gonna need to literally sacrifice everything in your life, get a lot of help from outsiders, and fall into a huge pile of luck - with the luck being the most important ingredient. We're way beyond the days of demo tapes, press kits, and being discovered. You can gig, travel, and live off of cigarette butts and puddles of water in the street, but you're probably never gonna make it without falling into a lot of luck. Hard work and having a dream doesn't matter anymore.

^^^^^This^^^^^

For those that jump in and do it, I have mad respect.

For the rest of us, it's all about recording and playing occasional shows.

 

[chamelious]

You don't need to keep a day job if music is your day job. In the meantime, if you can't afford something, you do without. This extends to health and dental care, birthdays, christmas, etc.

Still doesn't really get to the heart of what im saying, none of those things are essential. Dental cares gonna get sore i guess. But you can't just not pay rent. Other bills etc. Nevermind i reckon the issue's been dragged out enough now.

I don't see the point in playing covers and incorporating creativity. Well maybe i do i suppose, it makes you money and keeps you from killing yourself from boredom in the meantime.

To be honest, the biggest problem i have where covers are concerned aren't the covers/tribute bands that are out there doing it for money. Its when you see a band play live, and then they play a cover. And after hearing the cover/s, the rest of their own songs sound like watered down versions of the covers they play. Their own songs sound like emulation rather than evolution, i've seen it before loads of times. They always seem to enjoy the covers better as well, when the audience are shouting the words back at them.

 

[moresound]

stupid can't delete double post

I just started a Lt. Bob tribute band! <rock and roll smiley ~ maybe with HR vb4>

It's getting great reviews but I may end up changing the drummer for I'm looking for a more Greg_L type of player.

 

[Lt. Bob]

I don't see the point in playing covers and incorporating creativity. Well maybe i do i suppose, it makes you money and keeps you from killing yourself from boredom in the meantime.

.

then there's no point in playing live since ALL live songs are covers unless you make it up on the spot. The fact that someone in the band may have written the song doesn't change the other fact which is that it's a cover even if of their own song.
I'm betting that when you do your own music you play it the same everytime.
That's absolutely no creativity going on there in the live performance ..... just reproducing what you've recorded or practiced.

Look ..... first off, you're talking like any of this is an absolute. It's not ..... we're strictly dealing in personal opinions here.

As for writing and recording songs ...... I have hundreds ..... I don't know how many but I started recording in 1969 on a Teac 3340 and have at least a hundred reels of nothing but originals.
And then I switched to an ADAT and I have probably 50 tapes full of stuff and then I switched to a Fostex D-1624 and have hard drives all over the place full of stuff ...... I loved recording and did it constantly and constantly wrote. I don't have a clue how many songs I've written and recorded but it's an awful lot.

Personally I prefer playing live ..... I have more fun .... improve my chops more ..... I've actually lost interest in recording or writing songs in the last few years because I just prefer live playing so much.

And you can say what you will, there's no bigger challenge than playing with a band you've never heard as a hired gun and being expected to play everything correctly just "earballing" it.
And when you do accomplish that ...... it's a great feeling. OK, I know you don't really understand that ..... I've listened to your music and watched a couple of your vids and I doubt, at this point in your learning curve, you would be able to jump up on stage ... have someone say "Key of F#m" and play whatever it was without missing a beat. That'll come later if you keep playing.

But for me ..... that's a rush .... it's the same thing you get when you play one of your own songs and it comes out well.

Big difference is you'll never see me saying "What's the point of playing in your bedroom studio and recording songs that no one ever hears?"
Because everyone finds their own joy in art and it can vary a lot from person to person. The fact that you can't understand it simply means that you can't understand it.

For me the reward is playing at a high level and I don't really care that much what the music is .......
For example, I'm a top notch jazz player ...... good improviser .... I can walk in and play with guys doing Real Book stuff and I never use a book. Hell, the guys that do it all the time mostly can't do that. So I'm a qualified jazz guy and most good jazz players are snots looking down on anyone that plays 'lesser' music.
But not me ...... I have just as much fun playing twangy 3 chord country ........ I'd have just as much fun playing gergs' music ...... it's all the same to me ....... 12 notes combined in various ways.
I love it and I find live playing more challenging because there's no overdubs ..... no 2nd takes ...... no false starts ..... it has to be there right then.
Out of those hundreds of songs that I've recorded there at least 40 or 50 originals that are very strong songs. Certainly strong enough to put on a CD and stronger than a fair amoung of commercial music I hear.
Wifey's always after me to put one out ...... maybe I will ..... I guess I should do at least one solo disc.
And I suppose I will at some point but I'm already on other peoples' records and CD's and I just don't give a shit about that. It doesn't thrill me or excite me ...... playing live does.

And, though you don't seem to get that not everyone thinks like you do, I just don't see that much difference between styles of music and I certainly don't get more pleasure out of playing my own stuff than other peoples' stuff.
It's all music .. it's all the same.

 

[bdenton]

We Did It To Ourselves...

Back before the Beatles, there really weren't very many "self-contained" bands in the US. Songwriters wrote songs, singers sang them, and musicians were often "hired guns" from the AFM union hall.

But the Beatles changed all of that...so that's where I'll start, in the early 60's.

From almost the day I was born, waaaay back in 1949, I knew what I wanted to do with my life. Around high school I found a lot of other guys who shared the same goal. But we all faced a major handicap.

Our goal? To get laid. Our handicap? We didn't play football.

But it didn't take us long to figure out that the Beatles didn't play football and they got laid a lot. So we went out and bought guitars and basses and amps and drums and Farfisa organs.

And we started trying to learn how to play the songs we heard on the radio. Songs by the Beatles and the Stones and ? and the Mysterians and Sam the Sham (remember "Wooly Bully"?), and we all played "Louie Louie". And we played "Ferry Cross The Mersey" so people could slow dance.

We started out playing house parties and school talent shows, and the girls who weren't hot enough to get football players "did" us, and we were happy. We kept playing music, and some of us got pretty good at it.

By our junior or senior year in high school we were good enough to go to nearby towns and play their proms, or play dances in the American Legion Hall or VFW hut. Those of us who weren't underage could also play in smaller bars.

We were making a little money, so we bought better equipment. We got better at playing the songs we heard on the radio, and we were getting laid a lot. So, we kept at it.

We branched out, and started playing Friday and Saturday nights in towns within maybe a 100 mile radius of where we lived; but no farther away than we could get to by an 8:00 PM showtime after leaving our day jobs or college classes. A few of our "local" fans would follow us to our out-of-town shows, and after a couple of gigs in some of these "far-flung" locals we'd have enough "buzz" to where we'd make enough money to pay for equipment and get a van with our name painted on it. And we had money for something else...

I've forgotten the exact dollar figure, but $50.00 comes to mind. That would get us three hours to cut two songs and 1,000 45-RPM records. If somebody in the band could write a passable song it would be the "A" side; if not, it would be a cover of one of the songs that was on the radio last year. The "B" side was always a cover, usually chosen by whoever put up most of the money for the session; sometimes it would be the "drummers song", the one song that every drummer in every band sang back in those days. Most of them we gave away to friends of the band and relatives, a few of them we sold at gigs, and next week some guitar player will go up to his parent's attic and stumble across the rest of them. But we also made sure that one of them got into every radio station within 100 miles.

The End​

Or at least that's the way it is today, albeit with a few changes.

Now, kids get an instrument when they're 15 and learn to play the songs played by the bands that they and maybe 1,000 other people around the world are fans of. They take lessons, and being a great musician is the goal.

At about 16 they're still playing in their bedrooms and they start writing songs.

By 17 they've got an MBox and Pro Tools in their bedroom and they're actually managing to sell a few MP3's.

And they start bitching about how they can't afford to tour, or how they can't get a major-label record deal.

The End, For Them Anyway​

But it wasn't always that way. Part of the reason it is that way today is because that's exactly what artists wanted. Part of it is because the whole game has changed since the 60's.

And maybe I'll elaborate on it some more tomorrow...

 

[Lt. Bob]

I always played music because I loved to play music. The idea that it would get me laid never entered into it for me .............. just loved playing.

 

[moresound]

I always played music because I loved to play music. The idea that it would get me laid never entered into it for me .............. just loved playing.

Soooooooooooooooooo your still a virgin there huh Lt.?

 

[Corvette]

I always played music because I loved to play music. The idea that it would get me laid never entered into it for me .............. just loved playing.

My mom made me join the beginning band class at school. I was reluctant at first. Then the Crew Cuts and Elvis came along. Nothing was the same after that…until I went back to school 30 years later. Now I sit in my bedroom and play an un-amp’d guitar so nobody will hear me.