Gig to record a demo, or record a demo to get gigs?

[ChrisB2]

Originally Posted by jive1

A demo is a throwaway item... Using airplanes as an analogy, a demo is a paper airplane. You can check out the design and see if it will fly, but it's not meant to last. A release is the actual plane, and you want to be sure it's made well enough for people to ride in.

IMO this line of thinking lends the notion that producing a good quality demo isn't worth the trouble. I don't disagree that an album demands more, but even a demo should represent your band in a good light, with an attention to detail and quality that gives a positive impression.

Most target listeners will assume, since you had the opportunity in the studio for several takes, overdubs and patches, etc. etc. that the demo represents your band at its absolute best, probably better than you sound live. If the demo is quickly-folded paper trash, they'll think you'll sound even worse in their club.

I would not set out with the intention to produce a demo with only "throw-away" quality. Your demo is probably where a potential new client gets their first impression of your band, and you know what they say about first impressions. But if good quality is not possible, send the demo electronically; odds are good that a file will be played on cheap computer speakers whereas a CD is more likely to be played on a decent stereo... even car systems are good enough to reveal a weak recording.

[Roadkill]

If you video an entire night and can't get enough good pieces to splice together a collage of happenin' moments that makes it look like yous guys can rock a club somethin' is very wrong with your band...

You need two cameras (one fixed and one portable) and both a room audio recording and a recording off the board (I usually use the fixed camera for one and a field recorder for the other).

And most folks put their demo up on YouTube - but make sure there isn't a bunch of crappy footage on the same account that they can easily see . I've seen bands put up both a nice demo and a bunch of cellphone video with crappy audio and hardly anyone there .

[lokikallas]

Originally Posted by dhagler

A brief band history: I live in a fairly large college town, so there are plenty of venues with plenty of competition. My band consisted of 2 guitarists, drummer, singer, keyboardist, singer/keyboardist, and me. After about two months of practicing and jelling, we successfully played a birthday party. Then another month of practicing toward a possible event, when the guitarists lower the boom: let's go to Knoxville over a weekend and record a demo so we can start trying to get gigs (and oh, by the way, we want you to chip in toward PA equipment too). If you can't do either of those two things, we're moving on without you.

Now, let me say that, musically, we had good chemistry so it wasn't an issue of being able to play the songs we agreed on (although our inability to decide on songs could be a factor). The singer and I bowed out due to our inability to commit to either of the make-or-break propositions. I should mention here that, since my exodus, I haven't heard from any of my former bandmates so I don't know if they are still pursuing their plan.

Finally, my question: which seems to be a better strategy: record a demo and use it to "audition" for gigs, or play enough gigs to raise the money to record a good demo?

My 2 cents-
A demo should be 3 songs. Probably the first 3 you get tight. Don't spend a lot, but make sure you have those songs down cold before you pay someone for the time to record them. If you have enough decent gear of your own you could record on your own. You shouldn't have to have too many takes to get a clean performance. If you do, your not ready for a demo. Use that demo to shop for gigs, give away at shows, spread the word. Get a tight set down, then record the show using a zoom. Put said show highlights up on YouTube. When the band makes any money, put at least half aside for a recording fund. Get 8-10 songs down cold. Record said songs with slightly better gear, engineer etc... Rinse and repeat until your songs are good enough to have someone else pay to record them, or the band pulls enough money from shows to pay for it. If you pay out of pocket for a demo, make sure you are realistic about how well you know your songs. Finding out that the rhythm guitarist is actually playing the bridge wrong in the studio is a big mistake. You can easily find out if your ready by doing a quick multitrack one take style demo at the rehearsal studio. This would be considered pre-production. You would be surprised at the mistakes you can find when everyone plays one at a time with the rest of the band watching.

[obimark]

I am for the live video of your band showing what you REALLY sound like (or close to it).

A demo where each of you played your part 3-5 times (or more) separately is NOT the same as a live performance and most people are not stupid enough to believe it is. Play live, video your band playing live.

[jive1]

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

IMO this line of thinking lends the notion that producing a good quality demo isn't worth the trouble. I don't disagree that an album demands more, but even a demo should represent your band in a good light, with an attention to detail and quality that gives a positive impression.

I don't think there is anything in my post that says that you don't need a quality demo. There's no need to read too much into it. I'm just saying that a demo is for demo purposes, to give an idea of what the final product is. There's lots of quality prototypes/demos/examples out there (including paper airplanes), that are throwaway items. The reality is that most folks won't listen to your demo more than once. If you are cover band, it's highly unlikely that you will use that demo for radio airplay, to get a record deal, to sell at shows, to win an award, etc. You're just trying to get a gig from it, and what you need is an example of what your band sounds and looks like.

I've seen too many bands waste money, time and effort on demos, when it wasn't necessary. Most of my demos are done in the studio, but I'm not hiring an engineer for it, not using expensive mics or outboard gear, not spending as much time on individual tracks, not spending as much time in mixdown, etc. because it's something that someone will listen to once. But, I still need to make it good because it's may be my only chance to make a good impression. That can be said for any type of demo product or prototype. It's a throwaway item used to make a sale of the actual item. More time, money, and effort should be put into the actual product, not the demo.

You can check out the demos for my band King Comfy. Those songs and videos were done with the notion that they will be throwaway items.

Most target listeners will assume, since you had the opportunity in the studio for several takes, overdubs and patches, etc. etc. that the demo represents your band at its absolute best, probably better than you sound live. If the demo is quickly-folded paper trash, they'll think you'll sound even worse in their club.

That's assuming that you have a savvy music buyer. A savvy music buyer, like a club owner, has been burned by slick demos, and I know a quite a few who prefer a live demo with less audio quality than a studio quality demo that can mask alot. I know with one band I was in, our bookings for club dates went up once we had a live demo. A non savvy music buyer, like a wedding party that may only hire one band in their lives can't tell the difference between a live demo, studio demo, one with overdubs, one with autotune, etc. They just know whether it sounds good, and usually that's close to the original recording.

Personally, I don't do many retakes for a demo, if any. If we can't pull it off in couple takes in the studio, it's not ready to go live. I believe in giving a realistic representation of my band, as well as a good one.

[jive1]

Originally Posted by obimark

I am for the live video of your band showing what you REALLY sound like (or close to it).

A demo where each of you played your part 3-5 times (or more) separately is NOT the same as a live performance and most people are not stupid enough to believe it is. Play live, video your band playing live.

True.

I have a produced video which got us a gig that we can use to take live video in an awesome room. I believing in having both a live and produced video. A live one for the experienced music buyers, and a produced one for the less savvy. Ideally, your live video will backup what's in your produced video.

[dhagler]

Thank you, one and all! I don't know if I will ever be in a similar position again, but if I am I will print this entire thread and show it to the band members.

[jive1]

Originally Posted by saustindavis

Personally, I didn't want to fork out any of my personal cash except on my own equipment. We got gigs based on word of mouth and friends in bands. We saved up for about a year and put it toward a demo. If you have the money to spend on it and you're OK with chipping in then go for it, but I don't care to split costs like that. Hope it works out for you!

I haven't paid for a demo since the 1996. Technology lets you do alot with a little nowadays.

Here's a recording done in the studio in the 90s. Nice mics, going into an ADAT. Top of the line technology back then.
http://www.jivejong.com/music/boogie.mp3

Here's one done last year in my basement
http://www.jivejong.com/music/stupidBoy.mp3

[jive1]

Just to give a range of possibilities for quality of demos, here's a few examples.

Cheapest, least effort
Here's a live one, with the audio taken from the video camera microphone only. You can get this level of quality with most digital recorders.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r1AdjDwtiY

Cheap, little effort
A live recording done in a room that was mic'ed up. Mics were placed stragetically to get the instruments.
http://www.jivejong.com/music/OutOfNowhere.mp3

Cheap, little more effort.
This demo was done with no microphones or amps. Everything was done using an electronic drumkit and amp modelers. Didn't have to care about the room, or mic placement, or even a crying kid walking into the room (true story).
http://www.jivejong.com/music/Caravan.mp3


Cheap, little more effort.
A demo recorded live to the board. The song was done live with the band mic'd up, and recorded from the tape outs on the mixing board.
http://www.jivejong.com/music/YouMakeLovinFun.mp3


More expensive, more effort.
Here's a studio recording with overdubs and some pre and post processing.
http://www.jivejong.com/music/Semicharmed.mp3

Most expensive, most effort.
Here's a video that was shot with multiple cameras, and multiple takes. The audio was done in the studio, and we performed the songs along to the recording. Everything was synced up and edited, and done in music video style.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aH3VnXLsDX0

[ChrisB2]

Oops. It seems that you took my post way too personally. If you reread, you'll see I started with "IMO" and really only made the comment that your analogy may create an improper implication for readers. I really wasn't trying to insult you.

The rest of my post was meant to lend a few personal thoughts on the thread. No need to create copious posts to refute me...

Originally Posted by jive1

I don't think there is anything in my post that says that you don't need a quality demo.

Really. Hmm, IMO there could hardly be a better analogy to illustrate the extremes between thrown-together, low-grade worthless junk and the ultimate, maximum demand for quality than a child's costless disposable toy and a vehicle meant to transport human beings through the air.

Please name a common activity of the general public that requires as much care and preparation for quality and safety as air travel, or any man-made object worth less than the average paper airplane.

I have no objection with any of your points in your many subsequent lengthy posts, just the "quality doesn't matter" notion implied by this most extreme analogy.

Originally Posted by jive1

But, I still need to make it good because it's may be my only chance to make a good impression.

Exactly. That's the "+1" to my post, which was not really directed at you personally (sorry if you were offended), but other readers who might get the wrong idea from the analogy.

[pklima]

If you're going to do the live video demo thing (which seems to be enough for venues around here, studio demos seem to be mostly done by wedding bands and originals bands), do you think it matters how many views it has before you start sending it to club owners?

I don't think buying extra views is necessary, but I do tend to send clubs older videos that have accumulated more views over time rather than newer ones which might sound better and be more representative of the band today, but which only have a couple hundred views so far. Not sure if I'm just worrying too much about nothing.

[jive1]

Really. Hmm, IMO there could hardly be a better analogy to illustrate the extremes between thrown-together, low-grade worthless junk and the ultimate, maximum demand for quality than a child's costless disposable toy and a vehicle meant to transport human beings through the air.

Please name a common activity of the general public that requires as much care and preparation for quality and safety as air travel, or any man-made object worth less than the average paper airplane.

I have no objection with any of your points in your many subsequent lengthy posts, just the "quality doesn't matter" notion implied by this most extreme analogy.

Regardless of you nitpicking my analogy, it doesn't change the fact that a demo is a throwaway item that is usually only seen once.

BTW, I've seen and made some awesome paper airplanes.....

[jive1]

Originally Posted by pklima

If you're going to do the live video demo thing (which seems to be enough for venues around here, studio demos seem to be mostly done by wedding bands and originals bands), do you think it matters how many views it has before you start sending it to club owners?

I don't think buying extra views is necessary, but I do tend to send clubs older videos that have accumulated more views over time rather than newer ones which might sound better and be more representative of the band today, but which only have a couple hundred views so far. Not sure if I'm just worrying too much about nothing.

I don't think number of views or subscribers mean much for booking a local bar gig. It really doesn't tell someone how much you would draw, since lots of viewers can be out of your area. I have over 200 subscribers on my youtube channel, but I doubt if any of them would come to a gig since alot of them are not in my area, and some are underage. I have some videos with thousands of views that I wouldn't use as a demo, like my Tommy the Cat video.

[fraublugher]

It might be easier to record a live demo Live.

Arrange with soundman at a jam night to record ,you play three songs you want for your demo, pay him 30 dollars.

It's not impossible.

[zenman]

To the OP, I would also say that you need to give some thought to the PA issue. Most gigs I play, the band provides the PA. The band can either rent or buy. And there are different ways of handling that. But the bottom line is that the PA needs to come from somewhere.

[bound'n'blocked]

I agree that something that is live is the way to go. They dont want to hear it all produced and polished and something that you took 20 tries to get right...after all, you wont get that opportunity when you play the gig...

I record most of our bigger shows on one of those Zoom H2 recorders straight off the board. I put a demo together that is about 8 minutes or so, consisting of 8-9 songs, about a minute or so of each. They are crossfaded from one to the next to make one continuous track. I work in radio and get a few CDs a week from different artists. I honestly dont have time to listen to all of every song on a CD, so I can usually tell in the first minute if a song is good or a dog. I figure a club owner is the same way. I'll pick a good portion of a song, a good hook or vocal line by the singer or a good sounding lead by the guitar player...something that sounds interesting.

BnB

[MarkMgibson]

I still don't get why you're worrying about recording demos, when you've played one gig! Ridiculous in my opinion. Go out and earn an audience and forget the shortcuts.

[phillybass101]

Why think of it as a demo. Create a finished polished professional product. And have it for sale.

[dhagler]

So, one of the guitarists from the band contacted me this week. He and the vocalist who left when I did have been talking about putting together a band and making a simpler, less expensive demo. He also said he would provide all the PA himself and not ask band members to contribute to it. First band meeting is Sunday to meet the new guitarist and work out a song list.

I'm guardedly optimistic.

[bearfoot]

Originally Posted by phillybass101

Why think of it as a demo. Create a finished polished professional product. And have it for sale.

i agree with this. Get a bunch of quality songs together, then get them on disc as best you can. This will give you a focus and a product.