Does a band need a gimmick to make it nowadays??

[twdavis13]

Ok, I'm only an opinionated 19-year old, but does it seem to you like bands HAVE to have some kind of gimmick, or mainstream-esque quality to catch on??? I mean, I've see bands that musically, were absolutely horrible **COUGH-FALLOUTBOY-COUGH*** and still caught on some how. Look back in the day when all it took to make it big was musically inventiveness. Look at Led Zeppelin, and the Rolling Stones, AC/DC, etc. KISS wasnt a very good band musically but their gimmick was makeup and flash pots, and they made it. In the 80's, they took off their makeup and focused more on the music, and their popularity waned severely. Alice Cooper is sort of in that same vein, and they were never short on gimmicks either. I dunno, just shooting for answers here

[themacinator]

Man I hope not...I can think of many bands who have no gimmick at all and are becoming bigger and bigger. I love Wolfmother...just straight up rock!! And there are so many more.

[Pilgrim]

Yes, they need a gimmick: good music played well. Not all of them are capable of figuring this out.

[LiquidMidnight]

Originally Posted by twdavis13

Look back in the day when all it took to make it big was musically inventiveness. Look at Led Zeppelin, and the Rolling Stones, AC/DC, etc.

While those bands may not have a "gimmick" in the literal sense, they all still had an image and a mystique to them that most probably helped them achieve greater success than if it were "just about the music." Robert Plant and Jimmy Page were mysterious people, surrounded with rumors about black magic. The Rolling Stones were pure sex on stage. Angus Young wore a school boy outfit during concerts.

[jaywa]

Originally Posted by Pilgrim

Yes, they need a gimmick: good music played well.

Heh heh. So true.

Depends on what you consider a "gimmick". My weekend cover band has a father and his son both in it who both sing and play guitar... and that's not terribly unusual but around here it sets us apart and seems to help us out. They both have a lot of charisma so we kind of have a two-generation appeal that way.

Of course we also like to think we're decent players that do songs people like. And we tend to pull a lot of pretty girls to our shows so that doesn't hurt either.

[Jim Campbell]

Originally Posted by twdavis13

Ok, I'm only an opinionated 19-year old, but does it seem to you like bands HAVE to have some kind of gimmick, or mainstream-esque quality to catch on??? I mean, I've see bands that musically, were absolutely horrible **COUGH-FALLOUTBOY-COUGH*** and still caught on some how. Look back in the day when all it took to make it big was musically inventiveness. Look at Led Zeppelin, and the Rolling Stones, AC/DC, etc. KISS wasnt a very good band musically but their gimmick was makeup and flash pots, and they made it. In the 80's, they took off their makeup and focused more on the music, and their popularity waned severely. Alice Cooper is sort of in that same vein, and they were never short on gimmicks either. I dunno, just shooting for answers here

probably no more or less than they ever did.....but if you intend to make it is your intention to do it based on costumes/make up/antics etc. or on the music itself

[hover]

a few years back yes, more than ever (when all metal bands had masks or really stoopid makeup) but there's always gimmicks...but musical inventiveness means less and less to the mainstream these days. More than ever the charts are filled with "production team product" and marketing team molded personalities than with real deal home grown musical entities.

And it all boils down to your definition of "making it".

[Jim Campbell]

Originally Posted by hover

a few years back yes, more than ever (when all metal bands had masks or really stoopid makeup) but there's always gimmicks...but musical inventiveness means less and less to the mainstream these days. More than ever the charts are filled with "production team product" and marketing team molded personalities than with real deal home grown musical entities.

And it all boils down to your definition of "making it".

i see a gimmic right there.....why not market music from the board room instead of the band room...."hey john,did you hear the latest from-------,they're my favorite committee...the bass player's lawyer is way cool"......

[hover]

hahaha, yeh...all they need is a name

[MatticusMania]

OP: Yes, you mean you havent been working on yours? Well, youre never going to make it now...

[Jared Lash]

Originally Posted by LiquidMidnight

While those bands may not have a "gimmick" in the literal sense, they all still had an image and a mystique to them that most probably helped them achieve greater success than if it were "just about the music." Robert Plant and Jimmy Page were mysterious people, surrounded with rumors about black magic. The Rolling Stones were pure sex on stage. Angus Young wore a school boy outfit during concerts.

+1

You said better than I could exactly what I was thinking here.

In general it never hurts to have something identifiable about the band, but the proof is always in the pudding. I dig the White Stripes and they are chock full of gimmicks, but none of them would mean anything to me if I didn't dig the songs.

On the other hand, check out this band. They've got plenty of gimmicks too but somehow it doesn't make me want to listen to their music anymore. If you've never seen this, make sure you watch the whole thing. I was convinced they had to be joking. Apparently they are serious.

Keep this in mind, the music business has changed in several important ways.

1) Illegal downloading means far fewer record sales
2) Recording and distributing media has become much cheaper/easier/more accessible to the average musician.

Those two factors make record companies far more conservative with who they sign/throw money behind. What that means is much more bland repeats of existing music because they already know it will sell.

Guess what? Primus has plenty of gimmicks AND good (IMO), if unconventional music and I don't think they'd have a chance of getting signed by a major label if they burst on the scene today rather than in the late 80's/early 90's.

[guitfiddle0409]

nowadays ??

[Jared Lash]

Originally Posted by guitfiddle0409

nowadays ??

To distinguish from "back in the day".

[IconBasser]

depends on what ya listen to.

jazz? nah

Metal? nah (at least metal that's worth listening to)

pop rock? you betcha. When every vocalist and guitar riff sounds exactly the same as at least 5 other bands, you gotta have something that'll set you apart.

[GregC]

Originally Posted by Jared Lash

On the other hand, check out this band. They've got plenty of gimmicks too but somehow it doesn't make me want to listen to their music anymore. If you've never seen this, make sure you watch the whole thing. I was convinced they had to be joking. Apparently they are serious.

Yes, now there is apparently a "core" genre based on how you pose when you're playing. Someone please shoot me now.

[Dr. Cheese]

Pop music has always been full of gimmicks. The most obvious gimmicks are simply good looks, or being attractive. Although the Beatles were great songwriters, being cute guys with neat haricuts got them plenty of attention at the beginning. Michael Jackson got a ton of run from being a cute kid who could sing adult songs convincingly.

Even serious musicians get a lot of play out of gimmicks. Stanley Clarke, and his speed or Jaco and his showmanship, certainly helped them along with their incredible musicianship.

[alfredpunkjazz]

I don't think that having a gimmick is something bad... If you're serious about making it, you gotta have something. But on the other hand, I am one of those that think that some musicians don't want to make it and it isn't something that makes them bad musicians.

[jdieh1]

I love all those bands but I am sorry, they all have a gimmick of some sort.

How else is a band supposed to market themselves? If they don't then they just look like a bunch of average Joes playing music that most of the population doesn't even think about any further than "That sounds cool".

Old bands didn't need it as much though because there was far less competition and much more room for innovation and uniqueness.

[knumbskull]

you mean like the guitar player wearing a schoolboy outfit on stage?

or having a stage show full of big puppets of monsters and stuff?

or how about all four band members wearing matching suits and those pudding bowl haircuts?*

(* before they go bonkers on LSD and push off to india, that is)


...my point is, it's not exactly new

[JohnMCA72]

Originally Posted by guitfiddle0409

nowadays ??

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nowadays

JM