• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Age gap in the band?

smgleitch

smgleitch

May 19, 2009
422
7
Nashville, TN
#1
I responded to a CL ad and got a response. I was asked to come over for an audition. So I am excited. These guys are playing my style of music and I am ready to get playing again.

Now I like to do my homework before I respond to anyone. So I google the guy that emailed me about the audition and found a myspace page. He is either 18 or 19 years old and I am 37. I don't really have any issue with the age as I am most concerned about the music, but.... I would like to have some things in common with the people I play with other than the music.

Anyone else think it would be weird to play in a band with such a large age gap?
 
#2
Not really. The leader of one of the bands I support live (he does all songwriting, recording, producing, owns the brand/name, etc) is quite a few years younger than me, the other guitarist, the drummer, and the keyboardist. Like, 22 vs early 30s-early 50s.

If there's chemistry and you truly enjoy jammin' and creating music together, I see no reason why age would make any difference.

Of course we keep telling our band leader to ditch us old farts and get some kids his own age...:-)
 
#3
I'm in a 6-piece band where the drummer and keyboardist are both under 25, the singer/BL is in his early 30s, and the guitarists are both north of 50. I'm 45. We all get along famously.

If you like the music and the "hang" is good, I wouldn't be too worried about the age thing.
 
#8
I'm the youngest in my band at 23, with everyone else north of the 30 year mark, and some on the other side of 40, and it hasn't been a problem at all. We all have some kind of something in common with each other in some way, and we get along great. We all settled into our group style pretty easily, and we've got a good thing. I wouldn't worry about it Unless there is a serious maturity issue.
 
#10
There are some really cool dynamics that can happen in "two-generation" bands (like the one I'm in) IF you get the right people. The younger players help keep us older guys "hip" (or as hip as we can be with thinning/gray hair), and us older cats get a chance to mentor the younger members not just in music but life skills in general. I am very much enjoying working with the drummer in my current band (who literally is young enough to be my son), and I think the feeling is mutual.

I know for originals bands in particular who are trying to be the next big thing, a wide age discrepancy can be the kiss of death from a marketing perspective... but on a weekend warrior cover band level I think there's a lot to be said for having various age groups represented. Not to mention, it increases your potential fan base and the more people you can bring into a band for a cover bar gig, the better off you are... always.
 
#14
countrybass007 said:
Does 70 to 50 qualify as an age gap?
Click to expand...

LOL, heh, maybe not.

I think it all depends on the people. I'm 61, trumpet player in one band is mid-20s. No prob. But, ya know, it seems that some styles allow it more than others, not necessarily, but occaisionally. It's like it seems to be more acceptable to be old and play counrty or blues, for instance. Then, if you also have a young player in the band, it's cool. I don't think you'll find many older players playing the young stuff as much, though. Seems to work out more the other way, from what I see. But then again, You see a great mixture of ages all over with no problems. I'm sure there's some concerns in the marketing business for big mainline acts, though. All about money, ya know. But, as said above, for most weekend bands, hey, whatever works is ok. I remember playing with some guys when I was just out of high school for a few months before I went to college. One guys was 50s, another late 30s. It was cool.
 
#15
Yeah, the whole business part of this gets really creepy when it comes to making it today.

I was told by a credible producer;

In todays market a Stevie Wonder or an Aretha Franklin would never get signed.
 
#16
bluewine said:
Yeah, the whole business part of this gets really creepy when it comes to making it today.

I was told by a credible producer;

In todays market a Stevie Wonder or an Aretha Franklin would never get signed.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that this is really relevant to the thread, but I will say that imo there is no such thing as either "a Stevie Wonder" or "an Aretha Franklin" as indefinite articles. These artists were both products of their own time, as are we all, and they both got signed and made some great records. Anything else along the lines of the closing statement above is fairly meaningless speculation, regardless of one's view of the "credibility" of the source. It's a bit like saying "In today's market, the Wright Brothers would never be able to make the first powered aeroplane flight." :D
 
#17
bassybill said:
I'm not sure that this is really relevant to the thread, but I will say that imo there is no such thing as either "a Stevie Wonder" or "an Aretha Franklin" as indefinite articles. These artists were both products of their own time, as are we all, and they both got signed and made some great records. Anything else along the lines of the closing statement above is fairly meaningless speculation, regardless of one's view of the "credibility" of the source. It's a bit like saying "In today's market, the Wright Brothers would never be able to make the first powered aeroplane flight." :D
Click to expand...

+1
 
#18
bassybill said:
I'm not sure that this is really relevant to the thread, but I will say that imo there is no such thing as either "a Stevie Wonder" or "an Aretha Franklin" as indefinite articles. These artists were both products of their own time, as are we all, and they both got signed and made some great records. Anything else along the lines of the closing statement above is fairly meaningless speculation, regardless of one's view of the "credibility" of the source. It's a bit like saying "In today's market, the Wright Brothers would never be able to make the first powered aeroplane flight." :D
Click to expand...

Well, it's the way I see things. I am tired of arguing and defending my ideology.
 
#19
Currently playing in a church jazz band a friend from high school (35 years ago) recruited me into. Of 18+ pieces, 3 in high school, 2 college, 1-2 others under 50, the rest 50-mid 70s. The drummer has sheet music from his band 40 years ago with his name stamped on it. Lots of classic straight ahead jazz, a little Sinatra also. All new to me as my 4 years of high school jazz band was mostly Ellis, Ferguson, etc......so...the... chords...aren't ... written.... in.... I gotta read the damn notes.

I found a recording of Birth of the Blues to see how the bass player covered a passage and the damn guy was faking the whole thing. Reminded me we had a couple of Stan Kenton's guys stop in for a high school demo in the 70s and that bassist walked through a rockn Ferguson tune..... oh well, as long as they did it with authority!

There won't be any "chicks at shows" posts from these gigs:hmm:
 
#20
bluewine said:
Yeah, the whole business part of this gets really creepy when it comes to making it today.

I was told by a credible producer;

In todays market a Stevie Wonder or an Aretha Franklin would never get signed.
Click to expand...

Absurd. That level of talent would have no problem getting signed in today's market. In fact, they are still major players today. Define "credible."
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back