TimR

That's not quite what I'm saying. There are other things you have to provide when stepping up from the pub circuit. As examples PAT testing, Public Liability insurance, email correspondence spelled correctly I would also expect a written contract and a non returnable deposit. Once you have committed to a gig you're fairly bound to do it. Compared to pubs which you or they often cancel on the day, or sometimes when you arrive. This is why some people don't do private gigs. Not because they're not musically good or equipment is not up to scratch. Purely because they don't need the extra hasstle. Professionalism isn't just earning a living.

Obviously if you're not in it for the money and you are turning down party gigs in favour of pub gigs then that's up to you but you can't then complain that you're not getting paid much if 1) you don't want to be and 2) you're turning down better paid gigs. So my comment stands. You don't deserve to be. The thread is about money.

Lol. I play in a hobby band. I wasn't talking about the musicianship. That's not what is being discussed, it's the proffesionalism I'm talking about.

When it comes to parties soloists and duos are competing with discos as I imagine most of what they are playing has backing or simple arrangemnents. Couple that with the amount of set up time and gear. No drums for a start. Bands are different. Parties should be £450-£650 then dinner and dances £650-800 and weddings £800+ for your average pub type band stepping up from the pub circuit. Once you have an established client base then you can start to get a better feel for what you can charge them. The other issue is how much are you prepared to gig. One band I know do a pub gig every month.then a party. So they are busy enough then any extra they bump the price right up because they don't want to be gigging 3 or 4 times a month unless the money is there. You can tell hobby bands a mile off and they deserve to be paid £200 a gig.

As I say playing in a pub should be your loss leader and you should only be playing once every couple of months, not treating it as your main source of income. If you're playing pubs only and you're only getting £100-£200 and you want more then you have to improve your show and go for parties and weddings.

Pub gigs are, and always have been, a place for you to showcase and hone your giging skills. A place where you can invite prospective punters to see you and get yourselves known. I try to aim for £10 an hour per person from the time you leave your house till when you get in. So an easy local pub turn up,set up, play and go home could be £50-£80 a person. Parties start getting expensive as it's not unusual to leave the house at 3pm and be home at 3am.

Probably not EVERY Saturday night though

When you're in a band you are providing a service. Sometimes it's to provide high quality music, sometimes it's part of a package to entertain people on a good night out. Do the market research and provide the service that is required at the right price.

It's all about entertainment. You'll never get many gigs if you are a bunch of virtuoso shoe gazers. It doesn't mean that you shouldn't work on your music but there becomes a point of diminishing returns where the music is 'good enough' and you have to work on your stage presence and attitude. But some people are natural at that, especially in front of their mates. Wait see how they perform in front of a strange audience.

Piano, violin, bass, tuba.

Discussions where people have polar opposite views always go on for pages. Especially when people have strong views of the way things are supposed to be done based on their experiences. If you're getting paid it's not a hobby and if you expect to get paid you will never get much if you treat it like a hobby. At some point the band becomes a business. Yes there are many reasons why people play in bands. BUT I played in a band for 12 years that gradually evolved into something I didn't sign up to in the beginning. We had regular meetings to discuss "the direction of the band" and "the way forward" but people would nod and agree to things that they didn't actually agree to and then do nothing. Essentially you need to speak up and if they don't listen, or if you don't agree with the drinking then you end up leaving which is a shame becuase I think a lot of bands fold due to "changing attitudes". But again that's life. The older you get and the more you experience it, the more you come to recognise it before it becomes a problem and do something about it.

Mainly anecdotal but I was in a large band of 70+ musicians. It was hard to get them to commit to one concert a year. I've played in at least 3 bands that never got to gigging 'standard' according to the band leader. Another band the guys only wanted to play gigs less than 30mins from home and one band where they only wanted to play once every couple of months. My brother has had similar experiences including a songwriter who had written songs, got a band together to play them, then spent 3 months worth of weekly practices changing each song.

There are far more people in bands because they like to be able to tell people they're in a band than are in bands because they like to perform.

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1333977351' post='1609011'] I live in SE London and it's a two-and-a-half hour round trip for me to rehearse. I have a couple of beers during rehearsal - as does most of the band. This was the way of things before I joined them, so who am I to rock the boat? Had they been totally down on booze I would have respected that too - I can take it or leave it. It's just not that big a deal. [/quote] And to be fair to the OP he joined a band who rehearsed then went down the pub. They now want to change that and he's not happy with the situation. In his (and my) experience things rapidly go down hill after that. Personally if the band's not gigging I would have left well before then anyway.

It's not a case of telling people how to behave. It's a case of having respect for your fellow musicians. People just seem to think they can behave as they want and ignore the effects it has on other people. Sacking someone from a band is something no one really wants to do and this sort of thing can fester for a while before either someone gets sacked or gives up and leaves. Which is essentially where the OP is coming from. If the band regularly drink at rehearsals then obviously it's not the band for me or the OP. The problem happens when either no one speaks up or they're ignored. And what does regularly mean? And NO we don't all live in huge cities with bands around every corner. I drive 20mins to my rehearsal to play music, if I wanted to hang out with my mates drinking then I would walk 5mins to the pub.

You can either take it straight off the multicore or out from the insert. Probably the same thing. Why aren't you just taking the guitar lead straight to the amp off stage? Wherevwill the amp be located in relation to the guitar and mixer. Long guitar leads should be ok driven from the pedal outs. Back to the desk is straightforward.

Lol. One drummer I played with must have got a lift to the station and is still waiting for the train.

Alcohol is a depressant not a stimulant. It depresses your reactions and impairs your judgement. You're more likely to scrape your car on the garage wall than kill someone after a pint. More likely to miss the subtle ques from your fellow musicians like changes of tempo from your drummer. But if you're playing in a band where you all have a few beers, the drummer counts 4 and it's see you all at the end of the song, it probably doesn't matter. Depends on how seriously you take your musicianship. The first sense to get dulled from alcohol is your hearing which is a good enough reason not to drink for me.

You'll probably find that he's starting too quickly and trying to play too many notes. I've no idea how many notes our guitarist is trying to squeeze into the intro of suspicious minds but it's certainly not what was written. I've never heard a band play the intro to sex on fire properly yet. Isn't the accent on the second half beat of the bar or something awkward?

Anyone who thinks drinking makes them a better player should remember that people used to say that about their driving

A practice is not a writing session and a rehearsal is not a practice. If someone opened a beer at a practice, I would have to ask why? If they opened one at rehearsal and they will have a beer on the gig, its probably the best time to find out if it makes them better or worse. Probably the last person to ask if drinking makes a player better is that player. Drinking slows your reactions it's hardly likely to sharpen you up is it? If you're drinking to relieve stress it'll only make the stress worse. Someone 'needing' a beer is completely different to someone 'fancying' one.

[quote name='nottswarwick' timestamp='1333702784' post='1605379'] ....sometimes it is hard to convince them to spend 20 mins each day grooving to a click. .. I have to supply a hats chick or something when the drums are not playing, just to keep it together. ...usually subtle tempo shifts help a song to breathe. So the answer is, in most of my bands, yes. [/quote] I wonder how many bass players and other musicians practice to a click. I've not for a while. In fact I've probably not picked up my bass outside of rehearsals for a while now You HAVE to provide a hihat? Is this because you are asked or because the musician goes wildly out or just because you feel you need to. There's a cover of a well known LedZep tune that features hats over the intro which completely destroys the feel that the original LedZep tune had. I'll try to dig them up. I've asked my drummer not to do this over my bass intros, or count me in as it feels like I'm at school. He agreed with no discussion saying hd didn't know why he did it as I didn't need it. (which made me feel all warm and cuddly ) Letting the song breathe is an altogether different discussion and it's different to getting faster and faster until the singer suffocates and falls off the front of the stage.

[quote name='Davo-London' timestamp='1333662964' post='1605168'] I'm a drummer-bassist. Trust me there's lots of "musicians" that should never play with a drummer. They have absolutely no concept of maintaining a tempo. So as a drummer I have a dilemma, should I stick with the tempo and clash with the lead or go with the flow? I nearly always "go with the flow" because the alternative is too depressing. If you think this is an unbelievable (spelling) question then I suggest you have a look at your own timing. Most bassist are surprising poor at keeping tempo in my experience. Davo [/quote] That's an interesting comment regards going with the flow. Maybe that's the real issue some of us are seeing regards speeding up. On a number of occasions during rehearsals our lead guitarist will come in a beat early/late on a solo. I'll always try to stop the song and rehearse the section but the drummer will often just skip/add the beat so he is back in time with the guitarist which causes the rest of us to do the same. Usually The drummer and I change at the same time, I think we work well together, but the rhythm guitarist is another matter. Depressing? If it's a regular issue, and you're planning on playing music for people to dance to, it needs to be addressed.

[quote name='KK Jale' timestamp='1333543715' post='1603235'] ... Me. Oh, okay. Weak, I am. Weak. [/quote] You should be careful here. I used to play Gold by Spandau Ballet. There was a section that I could never get right when I played with the band but was fine when I played with the original. I recorded our band playing it and found that in the original the whole band held a note while the singer sings triplets. In our band EVERYONE was trying to fill in the space with some random fill. The singer was struggling to garble the words. At the next practice I told everyone what I had found. Me: no one should play anything, everyone just hold the note then the singer can fit the words in. Singer: I've never had a problem there! Drummer: I'm going to still play a fill or it will feel empty. Me: let's just try it first. We play it. It sounds great. Band agree it sounds great. Singer: I wondered why I always struggle in that part. Doh! Moral: always record yourselves and compare to the original before laying blame.

I try to make at least one schoolboy error every gig. It's what makes playing covers interesting. At the last gig the drummer announces that we have to lengthen one of the sets from 45mins to an hour and that we would be playing three extra tunes at the start of the set. So I amend the set. We come on and hit the first note. Hmm that doesn't sound right. I'm so thrown that w're past the intro and two lines into the verse before I realise that the tune I'm trying to play isn't what the rest of the band are playing. At the break I ask the drummer why we didn't play the extra 3 tunes like we planned. His reply - "We are. It's the second set that was too short" For the first time ever we had planned an hour first set and a 45min second set. Has anyone else ever planned a shorter second set?