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

[aborgman]

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

Haha, good one! But, like my earlier detractor, you missed the part where I said "what is the value to the COVER BAND"... not a musician... meaning, the BAND does not benefit from rearranging the song.

So the COVER BAND that knows the songs and doesn't have a bass player doesn't benefit at all from simplifying songs so they don't have to cancel a gig?

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

Yes, the guy above needs to simplify. He's not lazy he's under the gun!!

Right - and that simplifying benefits the BAND because the BAND can now play those simplified songs which they would have had to ditch otherwise.

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

Let me try to explain again as there is continuing misunderstanding of my point. I said "What value is there to a cover band to rearranging a song?"

Then I added, "...except to a bored, lazy, or unskilled musician."

Yes - your statement implies that re-arranging cover tunes is either:

1) Valueless
2) Only of value to a bored, lazy, or unskilled musician.

It's a false dichotomy.

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

I did not say nor mean to imply that anyone who changes a song is any of those things.

Well - you may not have meant to imply that, but you DID imply that.

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

And the question remains; what value is there to a COVER BAND to rearrange a song?

Ability to take gigs that wouldn't otherwise be available due to personnel issues.

Ability to work up massive song lists in short periods of time.

Etc.

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

IMO the typical weekend warrior cover band doesn't gain by rearranging a known song... unless the musicians are lazy, bored, or unskilled...

Or busy. Or the gig is last minute. Or they have to work with a sub. or...

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

then those musicians gain something... for the lazy, the time to do something else; for the bored, the enjoyment of playing something interesting;

The implication that the only reason someone would prioritize something else over a $100/night gig is laziness is... well... hilarious.

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

And I don't know why people are offended by the "bored, lazy, or unskilled" part. I dumb-down some parts, not because I think it's a good thing to do, but usually because I'm one of those three, and I experience each of them for different songs.

Because it ignores hundreds of other reasons for re-arranging.

Re-arranging isn't always dumbing down. Re-arranging isn't always done because of just one of those three reasons.

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

Sometimes I am bored. Sometimes I'm lazy. Sometimes I'm not skilled enough. Those facts don't offend me.

They don't offend me either - they're just reality.

The implication that those are the ONLY reasons I (or any other player) re-arranges cover tunes - IS kind of offensive, and REALLY myopic.

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

Don't know why that caused the panty-bunchin' it did...

Because you very strongly implied that re-arrangement is of no use to the band, and the only reasons for doing it are all negative reflections on the player.


Why do I re-arrange tunes? Lots of reasons.

Sometimes it's because part of a song goes over well, but not another part of the same song.

Sometimes it's just plain efficiency.

Sometimes they're too long as written and crowds love 'em, but get bored after a few minutes (see: full length Free Bird).

Sometimes crowds love 'em, and you need to extend it.

Sometimes it's instrumentation reasons.

Sometimes it's because a singer needs a different key.

Sometimes it's because certain aspects of the song don't work well live - fade outs, weird endings, intros, etc.

Sometimes it's because a last minute gig requires putting together a "requests" in a day or two.

Sometimes it's because a "request" appears right in the middle of a set.

Sometimes it's because I'm reading sheet music or charts I've never seen before - and simplifying makes it possible to get through a gig without a train wreck.

Sometimes it's because the priority of perfecting a tune for a $100 gig falls behind my real job, my wife, my kids, maintaining my house...

...and sometimes it's just because I'm lazy, incapable, or bored... but mostly it's efficiency, appropriate priority levels, and a level of commitment commensurate with the rewards of the gig.

[ChrisB2]

Wow, you're making a lot more out of my post than it deserves, and taking some extreme positions while at it. (Myopic? Ouch! )

So your entire post boils down to; a busy band, or a band in a pinch, or a busy player, would benefit from a simple arrangement. Okay, I can go along with that.

However, If you refer back to my post which sparked this outrage, you'll see I was referring to a "typical local working cover band," i.e. weekend warrior, day job, daddy-buddy bar band. IME a typical local working cover band does not have lots of last-minute emergencies where the only way a gig can be played is by dumbing down the setlist, scrambling for a sub, swapping temps in and out often. Sure, some cover bands experience that regularly, but IMO they are the minority, the big(ger)-time busy type, not the average typical local working cover band.

So yeah, I will add "busy" as a benefit to a member of the typical cover band... although it could loosely fit into the "lazy" category since an ambitious musician may learn the original arrangement even when time is short... don't know, I'm speculating there...

But I still see no value to a typical local working cover bar band from changing the arrangement... except the benefit to a lazy, bored, or unskilled... or busy... member.

And lastly, I'm sorry you took my post so hard. I really did not mean any animosity. Sincerely.

[ChrisB2]

Originally Posted by aborgman

Re-arranging isn't always dumbing down. Re-arranging isn't always done because of just one of those three reasons.

Of course. I never said it was. Please review my horrible post again:

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

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.......

Originally Posted by aborgman

Because you very strongly implied that re-arrangement is of no use to the band, and the only reasons for doing it are all negative reflections on the player.

Um, no. See above.

[aborgman]

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

Wow, you're making a lot more out of my post than it deserves, and taking some extreme positions while at it. (Myopic? Ouch! )

So your entire post boils down to; a busy band, or a band in a pinch, or a busy player, would benefit from a simple arrangement. Okay, I can go along with that.

However, If you refer back to my post which sparked this outrage, you'll see I was referring to a "typical local working cover band," i.e. weekend warrior, day job, daddy-buddy bar band.

I understood what you were referring to - I just think you greatly underestimate the "busyness" of folks in these sorts of bands.

One can't ignore the non-music demands folks face.

If a guy works 80 hours a week - he isn't lazy for not getting a lot of practice time in.

[cyclopsbookworm]

Good drummers get snatched up faster than a snickers at a fat camp. I say just start playing AC/DC along with him. Do some duck walks and kick jumps while you're at it.

[ThirtyOver]

go through the same crap every weekend. Drummer thinks he is gods gift to drumsticks yet cant maintain a double bass line to save his life. Every song is different, making it near impossible to follow him. leaving me and the guitar players to rely on each other and simply notice when he really botches it up. ....ask him why he cant play the song right and its always the same nonsense. "I dont like to play it like the original" "i like to add my own thing in" or my favorite "I have been playing so long I know what people want"


I would add ....if you dont like originals get out of the cover act business....you are fooling yourself if you think that any drunk person notices that your bass is is tuned differently or that the guitarist changed the lead a little bit

If "adding your own thing" is done in such a haphazard unplanned manner that no one can follow you....you are not artistic you are an idiot working against everyones progress.

if you have been playing so long that you know what crowds want....you should also know they "expect" you to be in time!

[JEDI BASS]

Originally Posted by aborgman

I understood what you were referring to - I just think you greatly underestimate the "busyness" of folks in these sorts of bands.

One can't ignore the non-music demands folks face.

If a guy works 80 hours a week - he isn't lazy for not getting a lot of practice time in.

If you're working 80 hours a week, what the heck would you be thinking trying to be in a band that needs to learn 60 songs?

That's usually the first question I ask when I'm forming a band... "do you have time for a band?" I wasted a year and a half trying to work w/ a singer and a guitarist that had crazy bad work schedules... never again! We managed to play one short gig that was up to my standards. Me and the drummer moved on.

[obimark]

IME there are recorded parts of certain songs that just DON"T make sense, and aren't worth duplicating, for instance the ending of "Are you Gonna Go My Way" by Lenny Kravitz, where he throws in ONE stinking bar of 2/4. THis is the ONLY bar of 2/4 in the whole song, and it is NOT worth varying up the groove of the song, and the rhthym to be true to the record, plus I already know someone in our band will miss it EVERY Time if we try to do it like the record. So IME, simplifying this bar to 4/4 is the way to go. The song loses nothing if you simplify this up.

[WJGreer]

Almost all of the drummers I play with are just like the one in the OP. They do it because they can get away with it.

"Making a cover your own" is nice; that isn't what the OP means. I think he means "failing to learn the part". It gets really bad when something about the drum part is a critical part of the song's identity and the guy is blowing it off.

Think "I Need You Tonight" by INXS. The drum part in that song has a little rim thing happening, which has to be there in order for the song to be right. Most guys just play 4/4 rock, because the song doesn't train wreck when they do. But it's not well executed either.

If you cover "Faithfully" by Journey, and the drummer craps over all the drum fills that make that song what it is, is he "making the song his own" or just being lazy?

[pbass6811]

Originally Posted by 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

Hey! What part of Indy? I've only actually heard from 1 or 2 other guys from Indy...

So what I'm learning, is that if you want to start a divisive and quickly degenerating thread, use the term "cover band", or just imply that it's about cover bands...

As a long time member of the "cover" band scene in my town, this is what I've experienced 1st hand, seen with my own eyes, or heard from someone that I would consider a reliable source-the bands that do the "right" things(show up on time, act professionally on stage and conduct their business dealings in a professional manner, play the songs their crowd wants to hear and play them they way they want to hear them), are the bands that work, even when things slow down. The bands that just try to "wing it", are usually at the good band's shows trying to figure why they can't get gigs or keep good members.

Having said that, I do wholeheartedly believe there's nothing wrong with altering a song for the sake of simplicity or if you can improve upon it, my band does it all the time. We change endings & intros(or dump them altogether), shorten painfully long guitar solos or mind-numbing outros, we even alter lyrics if we can think of something funny/cool/outrageous that fits! But we ALWAYS start with the song as it was written, and we usually end up with a version that we like, that has the signature parts, and, occasionally, makes people say "I like your version better". Ya' gotta' start with the original, though.

BTW, my drummer would rather poke his eye out with a broken drumstick than just try to "wing it". Sometimes he's too much of a perfectionist and we can't get stuff done! I love the guy and I'd much rather have this than a drummer that didn't try...

[ChrisB2]

Originally Posted by obimark

IME there are recorded parts of certain songs that just DON"T make sense, and aren't worth duplicating, for instance the ending of "Are you Gonna Go My Way" by Lenny Kravitz, where he throws in ONE stinking bar of 2/4. THis is the ONLY bar of 2/4 in the whole song, and it is NOT worth varying up the groove of the song, and the rhthym to be true to the record, plus I already know someone in our band will miss it EVERY Time if we try to do it like the record. So IME, simplifying this bar to 4/4 is the way to go. The song loses nothing if you simplify this up.

Funny you mention that. I suggested we add that song and we had trouble with that spot. I wanted to keep true but no one else even knew about the 2/4 bar. I pushed them to "do it right" and now we got it. IMO it really makes the ending rock... I would be disappointed if we played it 4/4 all the way through... for me it just depletes the energy of the ending.

I'm not saying you're wrong. Your position is perfectly logical and I don't fault you if you simplify there. You're right, for audiences, it loses nothing. But for me it would...

[steelbed45]

Originally Posted by WJGreer

Almost all of the drummers I play with are just like the one in the OP. They do it because they can get away with it.

+1
The real kicker, though, is playing with these people who trash can their way through a set, come off stage, and have people waiting on them to tell them how great they sound.
The last drummer I played with thought that every fourth beat of a measure belonged to him to roll through. A review of our band said the drummer "practically bubbles over with fills."

I applaud the OP for trying to get something more out of his drummer than a lazy 4 on the floor. A lot of these people are set in their ways.

[mellowinman]

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

Funny you mention that. I suggested we add that song and we had trouble with that spot. I wanted to keep true but no one else even knew about the 2/4 bar. I pushed them to "do it right" and now we got it. IMO it really makes the ending rock... I would be disappointed if we played it 4/4 all the way through... for me it just depletes the energy of the ending.

I'm not saying you're wrong. Your position is perfectly logical and I don't fault you if you simplify there. You're right, for audiences, it loses nothing. But for me it would...

I think little parts like that are the spice in what would otherwise be a boring soup. Knowing you can meet challenges like that make you a band that is working together. If it all possible, bands should work through those parts, and get them. I think nailing odd time signature changes, or intros, etc is rising to the challenge, and doing something special.

[obimark]

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

Funny you mention that. I suggested we add that song and we had trouble with that spot. I wanted to keep true but no one else even knew about the 2/4 bar. I pushed them to "do it right" and now we got it. IMO it really makes the ending rock... I would be disappointed if we played it 4/4 all the way through... for me it just depletes the energy of the ending.

I'm not saying you're wrong. Your position is perfectly logical and I don't fault you if you simplify there. You're right, for audiences, it loses nothing. But for me it would...

It does kind of PUSH the ending a little and I see why they did it, if your band can get it right consistently more power to you.
IMO people need to know why they have simplified something, and at least explored playing it like the record.

[BayStateBass]

Originally Posted by cyclopsbookworm

Good drummers get snatched up faster than a snickers at a fat camp.

Ha ha.

Anyone know how to clean coffee out of your keyboard?

[QORC]

I'm on board with the "if it's a cover, do it right" concept.

That aside, I've too many times heard lazy musicians say that the reason they're playing a song wrong is because they are being "creative".

Bunk.

True in some cases, but a BS argument in others. It's one thing to be creative. It's another thing to not learn a song and play it in such a way that it deters from the overall sound of the song.

[aborgman]

Originally Posted by JEDI BASS

If you're working 80 hours a week, what the heck would you be thinking trying to be in a band that needs to learn 60 songs?

If you consistently work those kind of hours - you probably shouldn't join a band... but folks have variable schedules, and jobs can change after a band is already formed.

Originally Posted by JEDI BASS

We managed to play one short gig that was up to my standards. Me and the drummer moved on.

I think it's a matter of having realistic (and agreed upon within the band) ideas about exactly what "standards" we as bands have to meet.

[aborgman]

Originally Posted by ChrisB2

You're right, for audiences, it loses nothing. But for me it would...

See - I play in a cover band for the audience and the money... not for me.

[lokikallas]

I support you OP. If you just played the right key but played all quarter notes for "Brick House" it sounds pretty lame. Same goes for a drummer playing straight thru a song that has offbeat snare hits. Note for note isn't key, but rather just spending the time to understand the nuances that make the beat special. Too many drummers think that just listening to a track is enough and don't develop muscle memory.

[Nashrakh]

Am I the only one who thinks Vanilla Fudge was the best cover band to ever have existed?

Now that's making songs your own done right... Listen to their version of Shotgun, it'll blow yer mind. They're nothing like slobs winging it though, and I think taking something and turning it into something completely different takes loads of skillz on its own.

Too bad that rearranging songs in such a way is forbidden by law over here (unless you have express consent by the original artists lol...) or I would found a VF copycat band...