Gigs can be so depressing

Teetonetal

Went to watch a mate play in his cover band last night. They were shit, singer my mate ,was average, guitar playing poor. Ok bass and good drums though. Did the standard repertoire. 150 ish people, dancing, drinking etc. They went down a storm. I got bored and went home to make cables.

Night before same bar. Different mates band. Really good originals band, tight powerful, interesting and all good players. Singer was extraordinary. There were 2 of us watching...

I find this so unbelievably depressing.

Phil_aka_Pip

sympathies. I think the first band must have had a good rent-a-crowd and/or the good looks that pull the girlies. I've seen the same thing happen ON THE SAME NIGHT. The shit band plays to an enthusiastic rent-a-crowd, the next band comes on and plays some hot stuff to 3 people while the rent-a-crowd who don't give a shit for music goes off to the bar ro have a drink with and fawn at their heroes.

Cirrus

As the songwriter/ guitarist in a gigging originals band, I have to agree .Sometimes it's the pits. Once played a gig to literally nobody at 12:30am on a sunday night/ monday morning - it was for a festival (glastonbudget) audition and we thought the organiser was in the building so we'd better play. In fact, he'd gone home at the start of our set and the only other person in the building was a barmaid waiting to lock up.

On the other hand, I get satisfaction playing originals much greater than I ever did playing covers. Watching a hundred people singing along with words and melodies I wrote is one of the best feelings I've ever had in my life. So it's swings and roundabouts.

Teetonetal

I hate it when rent a crowed only watch thier band... So disrespectful

DesVegas

If i had a dollar for every time we had a "Paid Rehearsal" which was when there was no-one there i'd have a lot of dollars.

lloyd

There's so many shit bands out there people don't want to take a punt on an originals band these days. I can understand that to be honest-Some of the bands on the originals circuit in Manchester are horrendous-I sit and listen to (virtually) all the bands I'm on the same bill as.

My band generally plays to small audiences-it does become tiresome but then again I love rehearsals, writing and when the good gigs come along they're even sweeter. Yeah it would be great if 100+ people turned up to watch us consistently but to be honest I've not got the time or the inclination (perhaps the songs or talent too!) to promote the hell out of the band. If someone told me the band would never do another gig-I'd still meet up weekly and jam/write/hang out etc, it's a good release.

I do yearn for a pub full of people dancing round while I play Sex on Fire et al, maybe one day I'll start a covers band too.

monquixote

The difference is that a "pub covers" band is a known packaged entity where people know what they are getting. Those of us that play in cover bands know that if you deviate from the script and don't play what's expected you can get a very hostile reaction from a lot of punters.

With your originals band you are starting from scratch and having played dozens of originals gigs on various bills and run an originals night at a venue in London 95% of originals bands can't write good songs and aren't especially entertaining.

How many of us can honestly say we go and watch a lot of unsigned, originals bands even if we're in one?

Teetonetal

I don't think I am concerned so much with covers bands per se... what drives me nuts is that people prefer to watch shit music that they know vs good music that they don't.. a good covers band is a wonderful thing, but most are just as poor as any original band. Far too many poor bands in general

Rocker

Teetonetal said:

I hate it when rent a crowed only watch thier band... So disrespectful

Why so?  People are free to listen to who they like/prefer.  Why is it 'disrespectful'?  Do you expect everyone who goes to a festival to listen to every band?  Does not happen my friend.

Teetonetal

Rocker said:

Teetonetal said:

I hate it when rent a crowed only watch thier band... So disrespectful

Why so?  People are free to listen to who they like/prefer.  Why is it 'disrespectful'?  Do you expect everyone who goes to a festival to listen to every band?  Does not happen my friend.

* sigh * that is not a fair comparison. almost every band that plays at a pro festival will have plenty of support. 

I've tried about 8 times to explain why I think it's disrespectful for small bands not to watch other small bands and I can't. I just feel that bands should help and support other bands - I would always watch other bands on the bill and would always encourage my friends to do so too, rather than slope off with them in to the Garden. 

I would also never help smaller bands out again if they don't hang around to watch the others. It's a scene. It needs work, it needs people to support each other, venues need this attitude too. As do visiting bands.

Bands who only play their local and play to the same 100 people every time get a shock when they go to other towns and suddenly realize that no one is going to watch them because their rent a crowd isn't there and the local band there is going to do to them what they have done to others. Originals music at the local level needs it's bands to encourage their friends to watch otherwise what is the point. 

Sure some bands are crap, some bands are dull etc, etc and I have no problem with people watching a few songs then heading off - it's just voting with your feet . but you have to give people a chance first surely?

lloyd

monquixote said:

The difference is that a "pub covers" band is a known packaged entity where people know what they are getting. Those of us that play in cover bands know that if you deviate from the script and don't play what's expected you can get a very hostile reaction from a lot of punters.

With your originals band you are starting from scratch and having played dozens of originals gigs on various bills and run an originals night at a venue in London 95% of originals bands can't write good songs and aren't especially entertaining.

How many of us can honestly say we go and watch a lot of unsigned, originals bands even if we're in one?

This is exactly it-most of the bands out there aren't worth the fee-even if it's £3....Then if they're really bad you have to sit through it, not be able to chat to the people you're with and it's not a great evening-you'd be better off in a pub with a good juke box....

I see a lot of unsigned bands while gigging and do go to one open mic regularly as it's for the most part very well run and they don't let any old person play-there's a big waiting list to play it. All this means that it's worth a punt as there will always be a decent performer on any given night. 

I go back to watch bands I've come across while gigging if they're good-and there is talent out there-but the days of popping to an unsigned night on a whim are gone for good.

The problem for originals bands is that there's far too many of them, most of them aren't very good and promoters/venues are happy to put any old shit band on the bill without even listening to them.....If a night/promoter put on only quality acts and got a reputation for this it would draw people in-whether that's possible or not I don't know-I suspect not....

monquixote

Teetonetal said:

I don't think I am concerned so much with covers bands per se... what drives me nuts is that people prefer to watch shit music that they know vs good music that they don't.. a good covers band is a wonderful thing, but most are just as poor as any original band. Far too many poor bands in general

I beg to differ on that. 

I think there are far more bad originals bands out there than bad cover bands (unless you just don't like cover bands). The standard of musicianship tends to be a lower (particularly in Indie bands, probably less so in metal where it's probably the same or better) and you can't fall back on a repertoire of classics. 

Also a lot of people are going out for a dance and a good time. An awful lot of the bands that used to send me demos wanted to play a succession of 80BPM songs in minor keys about how isolated they were from society and wondered why no one wanted to see them on a Friday night on the town.

ChrisMusic

Same as it ever was...

I have often felt that success is inversely proportionate to talent.

One small part of my original disillusionment with the music industry.

Little changes, unfortunately.

Same as it ever was...

monquixote

Also as someone who's played in both I find it a totally different proposition. When I'm playing covers I'm the "turn" provided by the venue and my job is to entertain their crowd. If no one shows up that's not my problem. When I'm playing covers I am putting on an event and it's my responsibility to promote the event and I shouldn't expect a walk up crowd. 

When I organised a night we used to ask everyone on the door who they were there to see. We had quite a few bands that would bring no one and then complain that we hadn't provided them with a very good crowd. 

If you are in an originals band and you don't work to build an audience I have no more sympathy for you than someone who owns a biscuit factory and complains that people don't turn up at the factory gates to buy biscuits without having done any marketing.

monquixote

ChrisMusic said:

Same as it ever was...

I have often felt that success is inversely proportionate to talent.

One small part of my original disillusionment with the music industry.

Little changes, unfortunately.

Same as it ever was...

Totally disagree. 

Of all the bands I played with on the Camden circuit nearly all of them that were exceptional got signed (Magic Numbers, Hard-Fi, Darkness)

Teetonetal

monquixote said:

Also as someone who's played in both I find it a totally different proposition. When I'm playing covers I'm the "turn" provided by the venue and my job is to entertain their crowd. If no one shows up that's not my problem. When I'm playing covers I am putting on an event and it's my responsibility to promote the event and I shouldn't expect a walk up crowd. 

When I organised a night we used to ask everyone on the door who they were there to see. We had quite a few bands that would bring no one and then complain that we hadn't provided them with a very good crowd. 

If you are in an originals band and you don't work to build an audience I have no more sympathy for you than someone who owns a biscuit factory and complains that people don't turn up at the factory gates to buy biscuits without having done any marketing.

Yes, that is true, for sure.

ChrisMusic

monquixote said:

ChrisMusic said:

Same as it ever was...

I have often felt that success is inversely proportionate to talent.

One small part of my original disillusionment with the music industry.

Little changes, unfortunately.

Same as it ever was...

Totally disagree. 

Of all the bands I played with on the Camden circuit nearly all of them that were exceptional got signed (Magic Numbers, Hard-Fi, Darkness)

I did soften it a bit by saying "I have often felt"  

My comments are a broad generalisation, as in the remarks in the OP which started this discussion, right through to chart and album success.

I haven't been actively involved in the music industry for a lot of years, but I doubt much has changed, it certainly doesn't seem like it.

There is a mass of talent out there, and always has been, very little of it filters through into commercial success though.

It is a truism in every creative area of the "arts" IMO.

Back to the music business, there has always been a frightening amount of dross that gets signed.  A contract is no gold standard, or guarantee of success for that matter.  (A contract is, however, when the hard work really starts)

The advent of auto-tune is clearly a response to a lack of talent, outside of its "creative" uses, as are a myriad of recording and production techniques.  I doubt whether the supplanting of the bands musicians with session players has vanished either.

There has always been a distinct lack of talent in the business side of the music industry too.  Throw enough shit at the wall and see what sticks !  Take a walk through history and see what conclusions you come to.

There is also a lot of stunningly good music and musicians out there too, thankfully  

Teetonetal

ChrisMusic said:

monquixote said:

ChrisMusic said:

Same as it ever was...

I have often felt that success is inversely proportionate to talent.

One small part of my original disillusionment with the music industry.

Little changes, unfortunately.

Same as it ever was...

Totally disagree. 

Of all the bands I played with on the Camden circuit nearly all of them that were exceptional got signed (Magic Numbers, Hard-Fi, Darkness)

I did soften it a bit by saying "I have often felt"  

My comments are a broad generalisation, as in the remarks in the OP which started this discussion, right through to chart and album success.

I haven't been actively involved in the music industry for a lot of years, but I doubt much has changed, it certainly doesn't seem like it.

There is a mass of talent out there, and always has been, very little of it filters through into commercial success though.

It is a truism in every creative area of the "arts" IMO.

Back to the music business, there has always been a frightening amount of dross that gets signed.  A contract is no gold standard, or guarantee of success for that matter.  (A contract is, however, when the hard work really starts)

The advent of auto-tune is clearly a response to a lack of talent, outside of its "creative" uses, as are a myriad of recording and production techniques.  I doubt whether the supplanting of the bands musicians with session players has vanished either.

There has always been a distinct lack of talent in the business side of the music industry too.  Throw enough shit at the wall and see what sticks !  Take a walk through history and see what conclusions you come to.

There is also a lot of stunningly good music and musicians out there too, thankfully  

There is no doubt in my mind that music has an issue with the number of extremely average musicians trying to make their way, there is a distinct QC issue... but then that's because people bang on about, feeling, attitude and energy.. and some very successful acts can barely play at all... (even if they do write good songs) 

so it's a conundrum.

This is why I don't suffer crap covers bands gladly - they have moved into the paid entertainers arena and therefore I expect nothing less than total professionalism, anything less is unforgivable - there are some utter tripe covers bands that can barely play and this IMO is a bigger and different issue to struggling originals acts and was the biggest depressing factor in my original post.

I don't mind the covers, it's the fact they weren't very good and still had 100+ people watching. That's what grates.

Cirrus

Teetonetal said:

There is no doubt in my mind that music has an issue with the number of extremely average musicians trying to make their way, there is a distinct QC issue... but then that's because people bang on about, feeling, attitude and energy.. and some very successful acts can barely play at all... (even if they do write good songs) 

The secret is it's not about making music.

It's about making art. It's about making people think and making them feel

You can be pretty fucking awful at music and make compelling art. You can be brilliant at music and not manage to make anyone care for the things you're expressing. There's only a loose correlation between musicianship and artistry.

But people forget that, because if you start banging on about art in a dump of a venue on a band with three metal bands who are all trying to sound like their favourite Slayer song people think you're a bellend! 

:-bd

As for the QC issue on the live circuit, for me it's very simple. Venues need to step up. They've got lazy. They'll put on a shit band for their first gig because they know all the friends and family will be there and that = ticket and bar sales. Of course, when the band leaves so do the crowd, and the venue has to move onto the next shit band to bring their clientèle in. Meanwhile, after three gigs the new shit band are only drawing their mums and girlfriends because everyone else is bored of them now. And anyone who might have gone to the venue to check out someone new was put off years ago by the endless succession of terrible bands that were being put on!

If the venues took pride in their entertainment and selected bands based on their own merits they'd be in for a fucking hard slog competing with tv, games, internet and a changed lifestyle but at least they'd be working towards a business model that's actually financially sustainable - ie building up their own crowd of regulars who go to see good new music. It's wishful thinking I know but it couldn't be much worse than the current system where the band, fans and venue all lose out long term.

PolarityMan

Well the problem is that the financial model of milking shit originals bands for 2-3 gigs then dropping them is actually viable for the promoter and has a good enough enough of a return on effort for the average talentless douche bags who become promoters because they cant even get a successful band going to continue to pursue it.

Good promoters who dont fall in to this category seem to be like rocking horse shit.

Teetonetal

@Cirrus lot of sense there