Function band vs integrity ramblings

[Ham fisted Bass]

[quote name='P-T-P' post='216936' date='Jun 11 2008, 03:00 PM']Straying slightly from the integrity discussion and onto something which has cropped up in it...

Isn't there more new music now, available to more people now than ever before? And isn't the problem partly that the best of that music is simply harder to find because of the sheer volume there is to sift through and partly that we're all guided by our taste too?

On a different tack again, isn't popular music (be that folk, jazz, country, soul etc.) separated from the other arts by the fact that a song, unlike a painting, novel etc. doesn't necessaily become an untouchable piece of art once the songwriting is complete, or with it's first performance or even it's recorded release.

While in many cases, the original version will always stand as the benchmark, it's not completely uncommon for a cover to become the definitive version.

Songs are living, breathing art because they need to be performed in order to exist. The Mona Lisa will still be there once you've left the room. But once the last note has disappeared, the song has gone and it was only those that heard it there and then who experienced the artistry involved in bringing it to life.

Each time it's brought to life, it will be slightly different - the musicians, the equipment, the room, the audience, the dancing and so many other factors all go into creating that little shared artistic moment.

Even if you've seen a song performed live by it's creator(s) countless times, it's only a collection of artistic moments you've been witness too, you'll never be able to get that exact same experience again, you'll never be able to own it the way you can a book or a painting. It's why covers bands exist. People want more than a memory, or to experience more moments. Even if some will be better than others, they still want them, even if they aren't fully aware of the artisic element of it all and express their enjoyment in less high-brow ways such as "I enjoy a sing-song." or "I love a good dance."

Every performacne is a little piece of art so we all have artistic integrity.[/quote]
Brought a tear to my eye....

[lowhand_mike]

[quote name='Ham fisted Bass' post='216972' date='Jun 11 2008, 03:45 PM']Brought a tear to my eye....[/quote]

amen to that.

personally i just like playing, my musical aste isn't really most of the music that our covers band plays, but i enjoy it, and if the audience enjoy it then job done.

and the songs we play though they are near to the original they all get a bit of our own character on it, like it was siad, they are never the same twice, similar but never the same and if you strive for that perfection the music will become clinical and flat.
the integrity is in playing as you, no one else. not being false.

[P-T-P]

Also, on the new music front, there's thousands (millions) born every year for whom old music is new music. It could be the case that at your next gig, you might play Mustang Sally and someone there will be hearing it for the very first time.

[lowhand_mike]

[quote name='P-T-P' post='217039' date='Jun 11 2008, 05:01 PM']Also, on the new music front, there's thousands (millions) born every year for whom old music is new music. It could be the case that at your next gig, you might play Mustang Sally and someone there will be hearing it for the very first time.[/quote]

case in point, there are a couple of young guys at our agency that hadn't heard some of the old music before, like the beatles (yeah honestly) madonna, michael jackson etc, pretty big name stuff and they had never heard any of it. so just think of all the songs that i am now playing that i hadn't heard before i started playing them and then passing that on to a crowd, who then pass it on. spread the love and all that.

[queenofthedepths]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='216968' date='Jun 11 2008, 03:39 PM']I don't think there's anything wrong with playing familiar tunes as-such, but I think a good public performance should challenge the audience in some way too. The odd old song or cover for light relief would no doubt be welcome, but at least send them home feeling like they've heard or experienced something new.



I've never gone out to see a cover band and I can't imagine I ever would. And I would honestly rather see a band made up of kids who can barely play beating the living crap out of their guitars with real vitality and belief, than see a bunch of famous, ageing rockers in a stadium with a squillion-dollar light show knocking out the hits they had in the '60s or '70s. For me, the former is going to be more entertaining. I think there's more humanity in it.

I suppose it depends what you want from your music and your musicians.[/quote]
I may well be going hugely off the point here, but I find Steve Lawson's thoughts on originality particularly interesting:
[url="http://www.stevelawson.net/wordpress/2008/04/thoughts_and_qu/"]http://www.stevelawson.net/wordpress/2008/...houghts_and_qu/[/url]

[BassBomber414]

Well, there's covers bands and covers bands.I wouldn't want to play in any band where I was not 'into' the music.. I don't care about money, it's about the music.I'm in a three piece power trio playing mostly blues based classic rock.We play Cream,Pink Floyd, Free,Joe Bonnamassa,Neil Young , Robin Trower, Rory Gallagher and ZZ Top.A lot of the old stuff sounds awsome played with modern kit.Way ,way better than some of the old recordings.Sometimes the band really clicks and we really fly up to a higher place and that 'buzz' is what I play for.
Our aim is to play an unusual set of covers, mostly of album numbers and play them hard and tight with real attention to detail. I think that there is some difference between a band that takes another artist's material and takes it onwards and upwards,or trys to play it better or in a different style and the band that is percieved as just a pop 'covers band'.

Edited June 12, 2008 by BassBomber414

[bnt]

Now, I haven't read all 16 pages of this thread, but I have a few thoughts on the matter, so I apologise of any of this has been covered already.

I suppose we all had dreams of being rock stars, as teenagers, but in my case it simply wasn't remotely possible. I won't go into details, I'll just say that I was living in a country (South Africa) with no social security system, and after I left school I had no support from parents or anyone else. So I had to work straight away, no chance of university or anything else, and imported gear was expensive.

Looking back, I don't really regret missing the chance to be a rock star, because I now know more about what rock stars go through. Doing the same thing, night after night, on the road, drove many to drink and/or drugs, or extreme behaviour. One of my favourite bands is Rush, and I think it's interesting to see how they dealt with the situation.

They did so much touring in the 1970s, that by the 1979 tour they almost called it quits, dubbing it "Tour Till You Drop". So, they slowed down, toured less and spent more time on albums - and constantly got complaints that they missed places, especially Europe. Over the last year, though, they've gone touring-crazy again, and they'll have 113 shows under their belt by the end in July. I don't think we'll be hearing from them for a couple of years after that.

Rush shows are complicated: the music has a lot of lighting and video cues, and they have to plan and rehearse the 20+ songs they do every night, in two sets with no support. As you might imagine, there's not much jamming or variation in the set list: Phish they ain't. How do they do it - go out on the road and play the same thing over and over?

Well, the songs themselves are demanding, but there's also what I call the Repertory aspect. A Repertory theatre company is one that repeats the same scripted play, night after night - whether on tour or not. For example, I saw the Reduced Shakespeare Company do [url="http://www.reducedshakespeare.com/books.php"]All The Great Books (abridged)[/url] in Dublin last year: they put the same show on all across Europe, though they also do longer residences at theatres in London and the USA. The show may be the same, but the audiences are different, and they actually interact with them. (I was pulled on stage, to take part in a "quiz show" about Dickens, I think it was. :wacko: )

I kinda feel sorry for Rush, then, since they have to be so distant from their crazy "fans". I suppose that what I'm trying to say is: there will inevitably be a Repertory element to anything successful: when you're good at something, your reward is to do it again, and again, and again. I found this to be true at work, too: there were things that I was good at, so I was asked to keep doing them.

Hopefully, then, it will be something that you enjoy doing. Something that lets you take pride in the way you do it, in getting it [i]just right[/i]. Or even expand: if I was doing those MOR songs, I would be trying backing vocals too, something those songs tend to have, and something I need more practice in.

Edited June 11, 2008 by bnt

[elom]

I feel compelled to add to this thread because a) I've hardly posted in recent months and I've just read 16 pages of this stuff so I need to post to validate the last 40 minutes of my life!

I don't pretend to be a great musician. I'm not ground breaking or original. However I'm not in my band (covers) to make art but, primarily, to have fun. For the most part I do and I really like 90% of the songs we do.

So my artistic integrity is probably pretty low in many people's eyes but my I'm quite happy with my personal integrity so I can live with that!

be happy,

elom

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='queenofthedepths' post='217084' date='Jun 11 2008, 06:15 PM']I may well be going hugely off the point here, but I find Steve Lawson's thoughts on originality particularly interesting:
[url="http://www.stevelawson.net/wordpress/2008/04/thoughts_and_qu/"]http://www.stevelawson.net/wordpress/2008/...houghts_and_qu/[/url][/quote]

I lost interest when he quoted Bono (someone else who should've been either exiled or executed decades ago) but he does have something of a point, albeit a non-point. Genres are fine, so long as somebody brings something of quality to it.

But he's not talking about cover bands.

[queenofthedepths]

He's just talking about originality in general (although maybe he'll come on here and put me right!) and the way I see it, originality is hugely overvalued. Performance and personal interpretation are far more important. So what I'm getting at is that even if you're playing someone else's songs, you're still creating art through your own interpretation. Also, as bnt pointed out just above, successful original bands generally have to play the same songs over and over anyway. Repeated renditions of the same material still have entertainment value.

[Paul Cooke]

Even Bruce Springsteen has covered Mustang Sally...

and Lynyrd Skynyrd have to do Freebird every show...

[All thumbs]

Haven't read ALL this thread, but enough to get the gist!

When I was 15 I started playing bass and quickly realised that's what I wanted to do with my life. Had no interest in school and kind of always knew whatever I did would be kind of 'alternative'. Seemed to me that in order to dedicate my whole life to something, I'd need to have some kind of a financial return to keep the wolf from the door. Never really cared about fame or fortune, just being the best bassist in the world (we all have dreams) and having enough to live on.

The three paths I could see ahead were 1. Get SOOOOOOO good that I'd be the UK session bassist of choice; 2. Join a 'name' b-list band from the 60's/70's and do the theatres/festivals etc. on wages; or 3. Play the clubs and pubs and scrape enough to live on.

Never achieved No.1! No.2 I did a fair bit of and have been lucky enough to play with loads of pretty famous musicians. Being on the road for long periods playing that stuff wasn't for me though. Did LOADS of No.3 and made a fair living for a long time from it.

The important thing throughout is that I was always doing creative, credible stuff ASWELL - be it blues/jazz gigs; studio work (again had the fortune to work with guys like Jerry Donahue, Clive Bunker from tull etc.); writing etc. This stuff is Food for the Soul to me. You see what I'm getting at - no's 1/2&3 above allowed me to do the cool stuff too.

Crap though some of the Club gigs etc can be, to me it's always been far more enjoyable and closer to my dream of being a 'professional musician' than grinding away 9-5 every single week somewhere I hate with a boss from hell (I did actually try it for a few years!).

On to the 'covers' thing. What the hell do bassists rant on about 'original' material for? I'm a bass player - not a song writer! I improvise a lot, and I interpret whichever song I play through my own personal style of playing - there lies my creativity. Every song I play is a 'cover' - whether it was written be John Lennon or the guitarist in my band! Doesn't make ANY difference to me as a bass player. Also anyone ready to slag of Elvis Presley; Frank Sinatra; The London Symphony orchestra for doing covers???!!

On to the present day and I'm now concentrating my efforts into the 'function band' market. I have a function band called Boogie Express ( [url="http://www.boogieexpress.co.uk"]http://www.boogieexpress.co.uk[/url] )and we play out and out party music. Guess what - it's great fun, and whilst you know that the audience aren't really getting off on the playing, they are really having a great time! To open with your first song and see the dance floor [b]fill [/b]and not empty (sound familiar) is quite joyful.

Still TONS of room for improvising too, and we have such a laugh slipping in cheeky runs, quotes & fills etc. The venues are lovely (unlike the horrible 'original' venues we've all played) and generally we get treated far, far better than in any other gig enviorenment.

So have I sold out? I don't think so. This year I've been playing with a really interesting blues guy called Will Tang; I'm playing Colne Blues Festival internaional stage with Linda Gail Lewis (Jerry Lee's little sister); I've got my own slot on the British Stage as the Scott Whitley Blues Experience; and another set on the International stage with Nuno Mindellis from Brazil. I've recently recorded an album with the Animals etc., etc. Just trying to reiterate that the regular paid 'cheesy' gigs allow me to keep my hand in and do the Credible stuff!

Hope some of that is an insight into why people play in function bands/covers bands, and that it's not really got anything to do with intergrity. In fact for me personally I would feel I had lost MY integrity if I had to get a 9-5. That's just me though, I play with lost of musicians who have regular jobs and they are true musicians!

Edited June 13, 2008 by All thumbs

[Sean]

[quote name='BigBeefChief' post='216299' date='Jun 10 2008, 04:46 PM']I've always had the fantasy of Felicity Kendall AND Penelope Keith - whilst Richard Briers just watches.[/quote]

I'd include Paul Eddington in there if it didn't cross a line of taste and morality!

[Sean]

[quote name='P-T-P' post='217039' date='Jun 11 2008, 05:01 PM']Also, on the new music front, there's thousands (millions) born every year for whom old music is new music. It could be the case that at your next gig, you might play Mustang Sally and someone there will be hearing it for the very first time.[/quote]

I agrre absolutely, Pete and I would add to that the fact that a lot of younger people who are into music don't categorise Jimi Hendrix and Led Zep as "old" music and say Tool as "new" music - it's just all a bunch of stuff all on sale at the same place ready to be bought and enjoyed.

Growing up I listened to a hell of a lot of music that was "before my time" (I really dislike that phrase) but was always conscious of what was new and what was old, I think that awareness is disappearing and probably for the best.

[Bilbo]

[quote name='All thumbs' post='218067' date='Jun 13 2008, 02:56 AM']In fact for me personally I would feel I had lost MY integrity if I had to get a 9-5.[/quote]

I actually consciously decided nearly 20 years ago that the function band/ships/cabaret/teaching route was too much of a compromise for me and I would do a day job I believed in first. That was why I started working as a Probation Officer. Some people's lives have changed for the better because of that decision and I feel ok about that. I have always held original music in higher regard than covers (early indoctrination by my bandmates in a HM band in the early 80s) and just find this whole covers thing uncomfortable (you have probably guessed).

I don't get that playing in a posh hotel and getting a free sandwich makes playing music that does't inspire me ok...

Sean's point about old music is fair but I also fear that we are fast approaching the point where rock music, in all its various forms, is becoming just another nostalgia thing. Its vibrancy was always its currency, its relevance. If we aren't careful, its going to turn into a dead art form like classical music and much of the jazz industry (what are Diana Krall and Stacy Kent if not nostalgia masquerading as art?)

[birdy]

[quote name='All thumbs' post='218067' date='Jun 13 2008, 02:56 AM']Haven't read ALL this thread, but enough to get the gist!

When I was 15 I started playing bass and quickly realised that's what I wanted to do with my life. Had no interest in school and kind of always knew whatever I did would be kind of 'alternative'. Seemed to me that in order to dedicate my whole life to something, I'd need to have some kind of a financial return to keep the wolf from the door. Never really cared about fame or fortune, just being the best bassist in the world (we all have dreams) and having enough to live on.

The three paths I could see ahead were 1. Get SOOOOOOO good that I'd be the UK session bassist of choice; 2. Join a 'name' b-list band from the 60's/70's and do the theatres/festivals etc. on wages; or 3. Play the clubs and pubs and scrape enough to live on.

Never achieved No.1! No.2 I did a fair bit of and have been lucky enough to play with loads of pretty famous musicians. Being on the road for long periods playing that stuff wasn't for me though. Did LOADS of No.3 and made a fair living for a long time from it.

The important thing throughout is that I was always doing creative, credible stuff ASWELL - be it blues/jazz gigs; studio work (again had the fortune to work with guys like Jerry Donahue, Clive Bunker from tull etc.); writing etc. This stuff is Food for the Soul to me. You see what I'm getting at - no's 1/2&3 above allowed me to do the cool stuff too.

Crap though some of the Club gigs etc can be, to me it's always been far more enjoyable and closer to my dream of being a 'professional musician' than grinding away 9-5 every single week somewhere I hate with a boss from hell (I did actually try it for a few years!).

On to the 'covers' thing. What the hell do bassists rant on about 'original' material for? I'm a bass player - not a song writer! I improvise a lot, and I interpret whichever song I play through my own personal style of playing - there lies my creativity. Every song I play is a 'cover' - whether it was written be John Lennon or the guitarist in my band! Doesn't make ANY difference to me as a bass player. Also anyone ready to slag of Elvis Presley; Frank Sinatra; The London Symphony orchestra for doing covers???!!

On to the present day and I'm now concentrating my efforts into the 'function band' market. I have a function band called Boogie Express ( [url="http://www.boogieexpress.co.uk"]http://www.boogieexpress.co.uk[/url] )and we play out and out party music. Guess what - it's great fun, and whilst you know that the audience aren't really getting off on the playing, they are really having a great time! To open with your first song and see the dance floor [b]fill [/b]and not empty (sound familiar) is quite joyful.

Still TONS of room for improvising too, and we have such a laugh slipping in cheeky runs, quotes & fills etc. The venues are lovely (unlike the horrible 'original' venues we've all played) and generally we get treated far, far better than in any other gig enviorenment.

So have I sold out? I don't think so. This year I've been playing with a really interesting blues guy called Will Tang; I'm playing Colne Blues Festival internaional stage with Linda Gail Lewis (Jerry Lee's little sister); I've got my own slot on the British Stage as the Scott Whitley Blues Experience; and another set on the International stage with Nuno Mindellis from Brazil. I've recently recorded an album with the Animals etc., etc. Just trying to reiterate that the regular paid 'cheesy' gigs allow me to keep my hand in and do the Credible stuff!

Hope some of that is an insight into why people play in function bands/covers bands, and that it's not really got anything to do with intergrity. In fact for me personally I would feel I had lost MY integrity if I had to get a 9-5. That's just me though, I play with lost of musicians who have regular jobs and they are true musicians![/quote]

Thanks for posting this - its the one post that I can agree with most on this thread. I can see Bilbo's point to a degree and each to there own but this post is closest to my own opinion on the subject.

Steve

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='218114' date='Jun 13 2008, 09:32 AM']Sean's point about old music is fair but I also fear that we are fast approaching the point where rock music, in all its various forms, is becoming just another nostalgia thing. Its vibrancy was always its currency, its relevance. If we aren't careful, its going to turn into a dead art form like classical music and much of the jazz industry (what are Diana Krall and Stacy Kent if not nostalgia masquerading as art?)[/quote]

While your latter points are arguable from individual perspsectives my only slight issue with your side of the lobby is that it looks down upon it's nemesis more aggressively than is warranted, it's arguable that the same happens in the opposite direction but that was covered in the "I hate Jazz" thread.
My perspective is one of live and let live, which allows me to hop into any camp I please, and play literally anything that anyone thinks I'm good enough for, which thankfully thus far has been enough people to feed me and my family.
We are in danger with your last points of denying our audience with what they enjoy. Surely the logical conclusion of that positioning is the death of any music that is played for the audience in favour of what the musician wants to play?
A far more horrible prospect in my view than the status quo (no, not the band)
Jake

Oh and there are no points thus far that have made me question my own integrity.

Edited June 13, 2008 by jakesbass

[Bilbo]

There are some fantastic quotes around from Charles Mingus complaining about the fact that, as the 'powers that be' can sell anything to anyone, why don't they sell things of artistic quality over shallow nonsense. His guess is that it is because it is easier to recreate the superficial again and again and not to have to rely on the individual muse of a unique artist!

People can't dance in 5:4 but I get requests for 'Take Five' at every other jazz gig I do (hate that one as well). I think (and this is a generalisation) that people don't actually know what they want because they don't actually THINK about what they want - most people go to functions not because they want to see a band but because a, the boss or their colleagues expects it or b, they are related to the bride/groom/birthday boy or girl/retiring employee etc.

I would be interested in finding out how many people in the audiences at these function gigs actually OWN copies of the tunes being played by the bands on show. I bet its not 20% of them, maximum. I mean, how many people in the audiences at jazz function gigs (with the exception of the jazz clubs) actually KNOW 'All The Things You Are'? I only ever hear it at the gigs I play.... I actually think the most played jazz standards are not the ones people [i]like[/i] but the ones that saxophone players can play easily and with minimal rehearsal (Softly, Canteloupe, So What/Impressions etc). When was the last time anyone called 'Lush Life' or 'Spring Can Really Hang You Up The Most'? So, my point is, if the audience don't OWN any of the tracks we play, how can we say that they LIKE or even PREFER them? I think they just take what we give them fairly passively and are grateful. So why not give them something fresh and original?

Of course, there is the point that all of us, as well as being musicians, are also an audience. Every function band I have ever seen moves me not a jot. So who is meeting MY needs as an audience member at a function. I know I am not alone in this and many rock/funk/jazz/folk/classical/world music fans hate covers/function bands as much as I do - do these people never go to functions? Yes they do - they are the ones outside ignoring the band.

I actually believe that the function band culture, like the industry of beans and breakfast cereal, is all about generating the most income balanced against investing the least time it takes to develop a product. No shame in that but I think the protestations about 'giving the people what they want' are a justification for that fact. I think most (not all) covers bands operate on a 'good enough' basis and, whilst there is no shame in 'having a good time' when we are playing, quality, integrity and expression of a personal perspective on music have a place too. The ideal is to have a good time doing something of lasting value.

'Professional' is no guarantee of quality - it is only a guarantee that money is changing hands!

[Cantdosleepy]

[quote name='P-T-P' post='216936' date='Jun 11 2008, 03:00 PM']On a different tack again, isn't popular music (be that folk, jazz, country, soul etc.) separated from the other arts by the fact that a song, unlike a painting, novel etc. doesn't necessaily become an untouchable piece of art once the songwriting is complete, or with it's first performance or even it's recorded release.

While in many cases, the original version will always stand as the benchmark, it's not completely uncommon for a cover to become the definitive version.

Songs are living, breathing art because they need to be performed in order to exist. The Mona Lisa will still be there once you've left the room. But once the last note has disappeared, the song has gone and it was only those that heard it there and then who experienced the artistry involved in bringing it to life.

Each time it's brought to life, it will be slightly different - the musicians, the equipment, the room, the audience, the dancing and so many other factors all go into creating that little shared artistic moment.

Even if you've seen a song performed live by it's creator(s) countless times, it's only a collection of artistic moments you've been witness too, you'll never be able to get that exact same experience again, you'll never be able to own it the way you can a book or a painting. It's why covers bands exist. People want more than a memory, or to experience more moments. Even if some will be better than others, they still want them, even if they aren't fully aware of the artisic element of it all and express their enjoyment in less high-brow ways such as "I enjoy a sing-song." or "I love a good dance."

Every performacne is a little piece of art so we all have artistic integrity.[/quote]


Theatre is very similar to music in that regard. As is spoken poetry. And ballet.

There is a difference between cultural artifacts that are a process and cultural artifacts that are a product. And there is some blurring of that line - a DVD or a CD is a product, but one that must be played to be enjoyed (ie transformed into a process).

Not to derail the thread entirely (or rather, to obviously derail the thread) I'd actually say that experiencing The Mona Lisa is just as much a process as enjoying a gig. Once you are out of the room the picture is gone and all you have left is a memory. The principle difference between process-process and product-process is that you can return to the picture and in theory it's the same artifact. But it will always be a different experience, because you'll be bringing a different mood, mindset and memories to it.

But I definitely agree with your post, just having a bit of a think. Good work!

[P-T-P]

[quote name='Cantdosleepy' post='218338' date='Jun 13 2008, 02:20 PM']Theatre is very similar to music in that regard. As is spoken poetry. And ballet.

There is a difference between cultural artifacts that are a process and cultural artifacts that are a product. And there is some blurring of that line - a DVD or a CD is a product, but one that must be played to be enjoyed (ie transformed into a process).

Not to derail the thread entirely (or rather, to obviously derail the thread) I'd actually say that experiencing The Mona Lisa is just as much a process as enjoying a gig. Once you are out of the room the picture is gone and all you have left is a memory. The principle difference between process-process and product-process is that you can return to the picture and in theory it's the same artifact. But it will always be a different experience, because you'll be bringing a different mood, mindset and memories to it.

But I definitely agree with your post, just having a bit of a think. Good work![/quote]

In respect of theatre etc. the difference I see is that you can't really mess around with them as much as you can with pop music. Sure you can give the soldiers guns but it would still be Macbeth pretty much as Shakespeare intended it to be whereas you could perform a song and it can be substantially different to the original while still being the same song, you can change it on the fly, repeat a chorus 'cause that's what feels right in the moment and so on.

Someone viewing the Mona Lisa on different occasions doesn't change the art itself though, whereas a covers band from one night to the next, and indeed one covers band compared to another, do effect change to the art every time, irrespective of the audience.

Unless we're considering the possibility that art has to be experienced in order to have value, which is an interesting idea and one which obviously puts the jazzers and anyone using a bass with more than 6 strings in trouble*

*just teasing folks, a cheap shot is a terrible thing wasted.

[lowhand_mike]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='218164' date='Jun 13 2008, 10:55 AM']There are some fantastic quotes around from Charles Mingus complaining about the fact that, as the 'powers that be' can sell anything to anyone, why don't they sell things of artistic quality over shallow nonsense. His guess is that it is because it is easier to recreate the superficial again and again and not to have to rely on the individual muse of a unique artist!

People can't dance in 5:4 but I get requests for 'Take Five' at every other jazz gig I do (hate that one as well). I think (and this is a generalisation) that people don't actually know what they want because they don't actually THINK about what they want - most people go to functions not because they want to see a band but because a, the boss or their colleagues expects it or b, they are related to the bride/groom/birthday boy or girl/retiring employee etc.

I would be interested in finding out how many people in the audiences at these function gigs actually OWN copies of the tunes being played by the bands on show. I bet its not 20% of them, maximum. I mean, how many people in the audiences at jazz function gigs (with the exception of the jazz clubs) actually KNOW 'All The Things You Are'? I only ever hear it at the gigs I play.... I actually think the most played jazz standards are not the ones people [i]like[/i] but the ones that saxophone players can play easily and with minimal rehearsal (Softly, Canteloupe, So What/Impressions etc). When was the last time anyone called 'Lush Life' or 'Spring Can Really Hang You Up The Most'? So, my point is, if the audience don't OWN any of the tracks we play, how can we say that they LIKE or even PREFER them? I think they just take what we give them fairly passively and are grateful. So why not give them something fresh and original?

Of course, there is the point that all of us, as well as being musicians, are also an audience. Every function band I have ever seen moves me not a jot. So who is meeting MY needs as an audience member at a function. I know I am not alone in this and many rock/funk/jazz/folk/classical/world music fans hate covers/function bands as much as I do - do these people never go to functions? Yes they do - they are the ones outside ignoring the band.

I actually believe that the function band culture, like the industry of beans and breakfast cereal, is all about generating the most income balanced against investing the least time it takes to develop a product. No shame in that but I think the protestations about 'giving the people what they want' are a justification for that fact. I think most (not all) covers bands operate on a 'good enough' basis and, whilst there is no shame in 'having a good time' when we are playing, quality, integrity and expression of a personal perspective on music have a place too. The ideal is to have a good time doing something of lasting value.

'Professional' is no guarantee of quality - it is only a guarantee that money is changing hands![/quote]


hmmm, i dont think it is even fair to ask how many of them own it, that, to be honest is pretty irrelevent. how many in the audience have heard alot of the stuff? i would imagine that at most function/cover bands gigs that the audience will be familar with a large chunk of the stuff. if they are not then arent we providing them with something fresh even if it isnt to people who know it? as to wether they like it that is completely out of anyones hands.

i'm not in it to make money as i would imagine alot of function/ cover bands arent. it may make a handy second income but few would make enough to live on.

also to assume "most" covers band work on a good enough basis is a little narrow minded, i am assuming by this you are saying that 'only' original bands make the music as best as it can be because it is there own, where as this can be the complete opposite as they become blinded by their own goal and what they think it perfect. I know in our band dont settle for "thats good enough", if its not right we dont play it live till it is, simple as that.

i'll reiterate my point on the fact that as a cover band we are not the orginal writers and as such will put our own stamp on the final product, our own style change albeit small at times or an almost rewrite as we interpret or adjust. and has already been said this in istself can and does produce a fresh take on a known track.

as you have geussed i play in a covers band, its not what i would say is my dream gig but i enjoy and make the most of, i try and produce and play the best i can and as do my band mates. we may not be the best but we put effort in producing the best reproductions of songs we know (or ones that some of us in the band have never heard and take them on board) the whole process of writing orginals or learning and performing covers envolve in my opinion the same amount of attention and desire to get it right.
Writing is a much longer process and one i would like to tackle but i have yet to find like minded people with which to do that (and not sure if i even could).

not wanting to start a fight or owt just i dont feel covers musicians are any less a musician that someone writing orginals stuff. the orginals guys my be better but then that is down to personal taste as if you dont like it then you wont think they are any good at all.

i'll shut up now.

[Bilbo]

It is unquestionably the case that many musicians doing covers are better PLAYERS (technically) than many of the players in original bands (most of us here could probably outplay Lemmy on a basket of skills). They are potentially more rounded, versatile, educated in the panolpy of genres required etc. But we are not comparing like with like.

The problem with music and musicians is that there is a tendency to view all music as part of the same thing, even to consider one genre to be a 'progression' from another (blues to jazz, dixieland to modern, rock to metal, pop to indie etc). This can result in a sense that musicians who commit to an 'earlier' form of the music are, in some way, inferior to the exponents of the newer genres. There is also the tendency to consider a more 'versatile' musician to be a 'better' musician, despite the fact that most of us would never publicly state that music is in any way competitive. This can, in turn, create a sense of hierarchy that places certain aspects of the world of music above others; creativity versus professionalism being the one under discussion here. It is therefore perfectly natural for exponents of any area of music to seek to elevate their professional perspective on this art form in an effort to validate it. I think many people here (and I do not judge them for doing so) are doing just that.

If, however, you consider the art of music to be something more than a marketabe product, and many of us clearly don't, then, from where I am sitting, it is difficult to see how it is possible to consider the reproduction of the work of others to be anything other than that. A pastiche, a caricature, a mockery. However serious it takes itself ('the worlds leading XXXX tribute band'!!?!! Damned by faint praise or what?), it represents everything that I DIDN't get into music to do.

I am sorry if it offends anyone, and it will, but I cannot see covers bands or tribute bands as anything but tired and culturally redundant.

[lowhand_mike]

its horses for courses really. i didnt get into music with any massive serious intent, i wanted to learn bass, had a faint incling of starting an original band but that just never happened, i kind of fell into the band i am now in and enjoy it.

if tribute and cover band are indeed tired and culturally redundant then they would have no place in the music scene. yes it is a more local and convenient way of hearing live music were the original bands would never play and allows a more simplistic way of getting into playing live music.

personally i feel that music presents much more than just the marketable product, i would have to really as i have made very very little from playing in our band, i get alot from just the practicing and playing live than the final payoff.

i also dont see anyone form of music as further up a hierarchy than another. they are imo all of equal measure regardless of wether i actually like them, they all have their advocates and fans and therefore have their place. (though i will admit to often saying 'x' band is way better than 'y' band but that refers to preference rather than ability or relevance).

as to wether your final comment offends, i am sure most people on here are wise enough to respect one opinion from another, and without this mix of opinions we would surely all be playing and listening to the same stuff.

variety as they say is the spice of life.

Edited June 16, 2008 by lowhand_mike

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='219712' date='Jun 16 2008, 11:05 AM']I am sorry if it offends anyone, and it will, but I cannot see covers bands or tribute bands as anything but tired and culturally redundant.[/quote]

I'm not offended by your view, neither do I hold great store by it, porridge for one. But the variety of views we have is what makes the discussion interesting.
This is hard to word, so forgive me if I condescend, I wish you shared the joy that I have for making music unconditionally. For me that is representative of the spirit of music. You and many other players I have met seem to have constructs in place that act as a bar to sheer enjoyment for enjoyments sake. It's not that I think more of my own position or value it more than yours, more that I have such a great time playing I feel like sharing that enjoyment with a slightly over enthusiastic child like effervescence. Get everyone to join in kind of feeling. Idealistic I know, but no harm in it I feel.

[Bilbo]

I think you point is very erudite and I completely understand your position. I don't think our actual positions are that far apart. Remember, I do play in covers bands - in fact, if you consider jazz standards to be covers, which, for the sake of this argument, I do, then ALL of my work is with covers bands. And I don't despise it. I don't despise the audiences at functions and I don't despise the musicians who I play with. I can sometimes get off on a rock shuffle or a funk riff just as much as a swing groove, samba or quaquanco! I just get a bit tired of people sending me cds with tracks on like 'Ain't Nobody' and saying can you learn them for Saturday's wedding.

Maybe I should just demand that people write out charts so I don't have to! My music study time is of profound importance to me and I have to steal it whenever I can. I therefore don't want to spend these (increasingly rare) moments learning 'Le Freak' because, in the great scheme of things, it is bubblegum. I can nail that stuff, no problem. but, as I said early on, its a shallow victory. I guess I want more from this enterprise than cheap thrills.

I wish I could find that 'inner peace' you clearly have! (I've had an idea for another book - Zen and the Art of Tribute Bands!! )