Yup, I don't want to play more than one or two weekends a month. That plus the occasional sound gig and I'm fine.CocoTone said:Its getting tougher and tougher to get decent gigs these days. We've discussed at length, the smoking legislation, and how it has put a hurtin' on our fave pastime. Are you guys getting enough gigs to scratch that itch??
I know I'm not.
Your the exception then. I don't know anyone who is getting the gigs like they used to. To top that off, the venue owners are getting so cheap, its forcing some good players to compromise what they like, to do duos and the like. Yuck.droptop88 said:Yes, right now 6 - 10 per month, but theres been lots of dry spells when the band wasn't happening, personnel changes, and other commitments. And this probably wont last forever either, so I might as well take the gigs while they're here......
jroberts said:Yep. One every 4 to 6 weeks is plenty for us. We play original material. If we were a "party band", we could easily do more, but then we wouldn't have time for writing, rehearsing and recording.
The St.Regis Tavern in London. They absolutely love us! :confused-smiley-010 The best thing about the place is it is completely dead by midnight. They usually close around 11:30-12:00 most nights. The last 2 times we've been there we played until 1:00am but could have quit an hour earlier - we just wanted to play our third set.hush said:Which bar James?
jroberts said:A band that plays parties.
jroberts said:Touchy, touchy.
It wasn't directed at you, and it wasn't intended to denigrate cover bands (personally, I think "party band" is a more appropriate term for what I am talking about than "cover band"). The simple fact is that if you gear your setlist towards songs people know and songs that people want to dance to, you will: (a) be playing a lot of cover songs; (b) have more opportunities to play shows than bands who don't do that. If, like my band, you play dark, moody country music that you have written yourself, you're not going to be able to play shows twice a week (unless you're touring). It's just not possible. Nobody is going to hire Will Oldham to play a wedding, a hall party or a corporate gig or to be their "house band". That's all I'm saying.
You say things that imply otherwise. Whether or not you want to admit it, you have a condescending attitude toward those who play covers.jroberts said:I'm not concerned about someone thinking I'm "inferior" because I don't do music full time. I'm also not concerned that someone thinks I'm a hack or a "typical punker" simply because I prefer to play my own music (which, incidentally, is a really strange assumption to make, especially when you've never heard me play).
On the other hand, you're obviously very concerned that people might think less of you because of the music your band plays. My advice to you is to do what you want, let others do what they want, and just don't sweat it.
So it's not just me?CocoTone said:I think guys that play'only origional' tunes, sometimes may be hiding behind the fact that they can't cop the right feel, or haven't found the right groove, or band, or whatever, to play a cover convincingly. Let me be more specific. I think I'm a pretty good player, but I know my limitations. I always feel a bit funny playing Hendrix covers. Don't know why, but I just do. I can play anything else, and put my own spin on it, but everyone recognizes it as a popular tune. I love jamming at the drop of a hat, with people that I've never played with before, and always have a good time, and learn something new. Some guys can't do that, so they hide behide the origional band concept. When a loose jam formulates, they're gone." Oh, I only do origional tunes."
Christ, even Rush does covers!!!
Nonsense.jroberts said:Congratulations, Milkman! You've managed to turn this into another covers vs. originals thread.
Its one thing to take a classic tune, and a/ruin it, or b/put your own spin on it, and come up with something unique. Its an entirely other thing to subject people to what you think is great 'Origional' music, that in reality is utter crap. No wonder most 'origional' bands play for nothing.The good ones have record deals.jroberts said:Who cares, though? You either like what they are playing or not. Why does it matter how well or how poorly someone can play a Hendrix tune if that's not what he's playing?
jroberts said:Who's "subjecting" anybody to anything? Maybe it's just me, but you guys have the strangest attitude to people making music that I've ever encountered. You do realize that every "cover" song started out as an "original", right? Somebody had to write it. I've been writing songs since I started playing guitar. I've written some songs that I think are pretty decent, and I've written some stinkers too. Like playing, songwriting is a skill that can be learned, but to learn it you have to do it. And I do it because I find it rewarding. Writing gives me a certain sense of satisfaction that is quite different from the satisfaction of playing. I like them both.
If you think my songs are "crap", so be it. If you want to look down on me because I write my own music, so be it. I just don't understand why it seems to bother you guys much.
Do you honestly mean that? The only good bands are ones with record deals? Unless you're joking, we're obviously coming from different places musically.
Who would have thought this would be such a controversial issue?
jroberts said:Finding "subtle derogatory innuendos" in posts that are in no way either intended to be, or in any way on their face, derogatory is a pretty clear sign of paranoia.
Show me where I've done that. I haven't. I wouldn't because that's not what I think. On the other hand, you made several express posts that state clearly that "original bands = crap". Then you accuse me of being condescending and derogatory.
Watch out behind you, Milkman! The world is out to get you!