Learn the song Drummer! Is this too much to ask?

[rtav]

I've had to let go everyone in our band that hasn't worked out for whatever reason, so I know what it's like.
I'd suggest record his playing of a certain song, then play the song back by the original artist. Compare how they are different - it's hard to argue with a recording of him at great variance with a recording of the original piece.
Let him know that unless some improvement occurs by a certain date (whatever the schedule/workload/ability level is), you will have to look for another drummer bc you believe that a cover song should sound as close as possible to the original - and your audience is expecting Journey to sound like Steve Smith's beats, not Journey + Phil Rudd (or his successors).
Then if things don't get better, and you can show it in subsequent recordings, it's on him.

It sucks that you gotta do it, but you got to do what you got to do.

[ronlitz]

I've had this same problem with many drummers over the years - it drives me crazy, and I find it unacceptable. I completely reject that argument that playing it like the record is a bad thing. Skipping all of the signature fills for a song, and not even playing the right basic beat is not being "creative" or "making it your own" - it's just being lazy. I once recorded a gig with one of these "wing it" drummers, and compared the recording of a few songs to the actual recording by the artist. Guess what? Our "wing it" version SUCKED!
I've concluded that drummers are either the type willing to learn the song, or they aren't. I've never been able to coerce a "wing it" drummer to start learning the songs - so if that matters to you, you have to try as best as possible to weed them out during the audition process - because they aren't going to change. When I audition for a band, I record it and then listen closely to the drummer. If he isn't playing any of the fills or signature parts, I politely decline if they extend me an offer.
OK, rant off. This is a topic that really sets me off.

[lfmn16]

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

Who is the judge of the quality of your interpretation of the song?

No offense, I'm genuinely curious...

It depends; if your goal is to make music then it doesn't matter what anyone thinks except the band. There really isn't good music or bad music, just people's opinions. If your goal is to make money then the audience is the judge; if they don't like it they vote with their feet and you can't get work.

[ChrisB2]

Originally Posted by lfmn16

It depends; if your goal is to make music then it doesn't matter what anyone thinks except the band. There really isn't good music or bad music, just people's opinions. If your goal is to make money then the audience is the judge; if they don't like it they vote with their feet and you can't get work.

Of course, anyone can make any music they want, and in a basement setting it won't matter how true it is to the original... that's why the question only makes sense for a working cover band, which has been the general theme of the thread.

I'm not trying to be a jerk... I just can't see the value in changing the arrangement of a cover song in a typical local working cover band... except to a bored, lazy, or unskilled musician...

Again, if you're putting the time in to come up with a great alternate arrangement, and it truly is as good or better than the original, and audiences like it too, then I can see the point. If it's just "easier" to do it your way, then.......

[Big Brother]

Originally Posted by Groovy_Gravy

Eh, i wont comment on what the guy should do but Iwill say that your music views go completely against mine... exact covers suck and take 0 creativity..make it your own...

If only people cared about the artistic integrity of a local cover band...

[BayStateBass]

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

Of course, anyone can make any music they want, and in a basement setting it won't matter how true it is to the original... that's why the question only makes sense for a working cover band, which has been the general theme of the thread.

I'm not trying to be a jerk... I just can't see the value in changing the arrangement of a cover song in a typical local working cover band... except to a bored, lazy, or unskilled musician...

Again, if you're putting the time in to come up with a great alternate arrangement, and it truly is as good or better than the original, and audiences like it too, then I can see the point. If it's just "easier" to do it your way, then.......

In our case some of the arrangement are different because of our (lack of) skill level.

Depending on songs, we have some that each person struggles with.

For me, it's Honky Tonk Badonkadonk. No matter how hard I try I just can't get that bassline, the slapping and popping involved is more than I can provide. Actually, we dropped the song because I could not pull my weight on it.

[Big Brother]

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

Of course, anyone can make any music they want, and in a basement setting it won't matter how true it is to the original... that's why the question only makes sense for a working cover band, which has been the general theme of the thread.

I'm not trying to be a jerk... I just can't see the value in changing the arrangement of a cover song in a typical local working cover band... except to a bored, lazy, or unskilled musician...

Again, if you're putting the time in to come up with a great alternate arrangement, and it truly is as good or better than the original, and audiences like it too, then I can see the point. If it's just "easier" to do it your way, then.......

Some never seem to understand that being a performer isn't about them. The concept got corrupted somewhere to the point that now artists think they are the art.

It's great to hear someone take a song and do something creative with it, but the idea that one HAS to because they have some vague artists code to follow is absurd and embarrassing for me to watch.

[derrico1]

Originally Posted by agreatheight

There is no right or wrong as to how to play covers. The important thing is that all the people in the band are on the same page.

I pretty much agree, although there are at least a couple wrong ways to play a cover: shoot for a faithful cover that the band lacks the chops or ears to deliver, or replace whatever was musically interesting/exciting in the original with a musically and emotionally bland "re-arrangement."

Similarly, I've never seen a cover-band *crowd* upset when a band plays a popular tune nuance-for-nuance with energy and charisma, despite the wincing and nose-holding of those musicians in the venue who posture themselves above that sort of thing. (Not sure how *they* got there; musta got lost on the way to their own gigs, I suppose.)

[ronlitz]

Originally Posted by Groovy_Gravy

Eh, i wont comment on what the guy should do but Iwill say that your music views go completely against mine... exact covers suck and take 0 creativity..make it your own...

Aren't all of the professional musicians in every symphony orchestra playing the music in front of them exactly as written?

[morgansterne]

yeah, I saw Rush on their clockwork angels tour and the whole audience was booing the entire time. some people were yelling "you sound just like a jukebox! that's not creative!"

c'mon, putting your own spin on a cover is FINE. totally cool. But what the op is talking about is someone just phoning it in because they don't care. How is a bass player supposed to practice a tune when he doesn't have any idea what beat the drummer will play? Does it then become everyone else's job to change what they play to fit the drummer's new "creative" beat?????????

[Edward G.]

My personal take is that the money on a cover tune has already been made—by the original artist. Your job as interpreter of that music is to remain true to the original spirit of the song, not play it note-for-note from end to end. That having been said, you have to know what the original song IS before you can take liberties with it.

Look at all the original artists who don't even play their own music that close in person. The recorded moment was then; this moment is now. But you cannot argue that they didn't totally know the song before taking off on it.

[jamminology101]

Amazes me how this thread has gone to should covers b done precisely like the recording....anyway I have had this exact conversation with band mates in most of my bands for 25 years. Most people don't have the time/fortitude/patience to grind thru a tough song piece by piece slowly putting it together till they nail it. The ones who do are fun to jam with. I've found out that its hard to compare gettin all the bass parts to gettin all the drum parts because playing drums takes an incredible amount of coordination and takes most drummers longer to get all those limbs working in concert with all the right parts at all the perfect times...the ones who do usually are the ones working the real good gigs in the area and jamming with those dudes is nothing short of magic. The best thing u can hope for is ur drummer has some pride and the required talent and goes back and woodsheds and learns the parts after he is off and running. No drummer I have ever played with has ever done the intro to zeps "rock n roll" right......just sayin

[Edward G.]

Originally Posted by jamminology101

No drummer I have ever played with has ever done the intro to zeps "rock n roll" right......just sayin

Funny, it's the only thing some drummers I know insist on playing correctly.

[rtav]

Not to further the detour this thread has taken... but... in my band we buy the sheet music and reproduce every cover note for note exactly as written out, and reference the sheet music from time to time to make sure we are on track with it - whether it's the bass, drums, keys or guitar. That's just our preference, YMMV.

[Edward G.]

Originally Posted by rtav

Not to further the detour this thread has taken... but... in my band we buy the sheet music and reproduce every cover note for note exactly as written out, and reference the sheet music from time to time to make sure we are on track with it - whether it's the bass, drums, keys or guitar. That's just our preference, YMMV.

Not to be too big of a dope here, but the official sheet music often contains egregious differences from the original or even best known performance of a given song. It may be good at keeping a band together harmonically but does not necessarily bear a close resemblance to any popular performance. Who writes it?

[rtav]

Originally Posted by Edward G.

Not to be too big of a dope here, but the official sheet music often contains egregious differences from the original or even best known performance of a given song.

It can be at variance depending on the artist, but the covers we do are Dream Theater stuff (always the same as the music except when arranged into different parts for a medley, etc., using the official sheet music proofread and corrected by Jordan Rudess); Zappa (known for using the music), Emerson Lake and Palmer (also written out and exact except when deliberately changed [lowered for instance] and if we do a Rush cover, the drummer follows Peart's music note for note (Peart plays it pretty much the same every time) and I follow Geddy's studio recordings and the music for them.

[Edward G.]

Written music takes all the guesswork out, for sure.

[BayStateBass]

Originally Posted by Edward G.

Written music takes all the guesswork out, for sure.

Yes. But to use it requires having musicians who can read it. I can, one of our guitarists can, but the others cannot.

I'd be willing to bet most part-time players cannot read music very well, if at all.

In reading back through a lot of this, I would have to say that I do agree with the others who stated that the drummer, or any musician should learn the song. If you have a drummer who is just plain playing wrong beats, and totally making it up as they go it makes the job of everyone else almost impossible, or at least far more difficult.

As far as how exactly they reproduce, well, that's a total gray area.


Edward G. wrote:


My personal take is that the money on a cover tune has already been made—by the original artist. Your job as interpreter of that music is to remain true to the original spirit of the song, not play it note-for-note from end to end. That having been said, you have to know what the original song IS before you can take liberties with it.

Look at all the original artists who don't even play their own music that close in person. The recorded moment was then; this moment is now. But you cannot argue that they didn't totally know the song before taking off on it.


I couldn't agree more.

[lfmn16]

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

I'm not trying to be a jerk... I just can't see the value in changing the arrangement of a cover song in a typical local working cover band... except to a bored, lazy, or unskilled musician...

And comments like this are why these threads always end badly.

[tdub0199]

Originally Posted by Pacman

I'll never play it just like the record. And it ain't cause I can't.

^This^