Audition process pet peeve

[RGerhart]

I need a little insight with the audition process for joining a band. First, my general view and thought process:

I look at an audition the same way I look at an interview for a job: you have some ideas of what you are getting into (job description), you prepare some material (resume), you perform with the band (interviewer ask questions), then you socialize and see if your personality is cohesive enough with everyone else. This might be over more than one meeting, but you get the idea.

I pride myself on being prepared for auditions, and I generally learn everything by ear and notate it out, note for note. Later on after getting the feel for the song I might change things up and interprete it in my own way. I will learn the songs that are given to me for the audition, and that's that.

Now here is my pet peeve. Without fail, most auditions I've had and ones I've participated in when auditioning other musicians, inevitably leads to this scenario: we play the tunes, and it goes smoothly. After covering all the audition songs, the bandleader suggests "hey, let's do these tunes." Or, "hey, do you know these other tunes? No? Okay, well let's jam through them. You'll pick them up." Okay, guy. So, you asked me to learn songs for the audition, and now you just expect me to fumble my way through some tunes I don't know? Oh yeah, this is a great use of everyone's time.

Maybe it's just me, but I'm often inclined to respond with "why don't I just learn these other tunes at home on my own time [because I value people's time], come back and then play them? That way they sound better, and we don't waste anyone's time."

On the other hand, I understand maybe they want to see how someone does when they are put on the spot and are forced to improvise. I don't feel like this is as good of an approach when you are playing cover songs, since fumbling through something doesn't do the song justice. I really try to avoid the "jam" crowd of players that don't prepare for gigs and just show up thinking they can "play by ear" and just embrace mediocrity.

Am I in the minority in this situation? How many of you have experienced this, and what was your response?

I have to note that also, I have learned from this and have taken the initiative to learn 2 - 3 songs from the band's repertoire that they don't suggest for the audition, expecting this scenario above to occur.

 

[FunkHead]

My choice is not there in the poll. I would vote No but I'd give it me best shot.

 

[Oddly]

I voted yes, but prefer not to.
That said, I'd do my best to improvise.

 

[bikeplate]

sure. What key?

 

[LBS-bass]

I put yes and I enjoy it, BUT I don't think it's a proper way to audition. However, I've seen it happen often enough to know that it's going to occur, and I roll with it when it does because it doesn't intimidate me as long as we can find songs that I am somewhat familiar with.

Typically I try to take a little bit of control over the audition process by letting them know in advance what songs I'm going to be most well-prepared for, because the first thing I want to know is whether or not they respect the process and the player. If I walk in with my list and I've told them what I know, it's telling if they start right off with different songs, or act like they didn't see that I sent them this info. If I have to say "I sent you a list, let's start with those instead" then they lose a pretty large number of brownie points. And so on. There's a lot you can do to evaluate things during the audition.

If/when it gets to the point where we're jamming, I can tell something about their skill level and what they're into if I'm suggesting songs that they don't know. How quickly do they pick things up? Is someone tied to charts and unable to improvise? So there's benefit to be had there, but I don't necessarily think that it's proper to expect that level of competence from musicians in all situations.

So basically you'd hope they'll stick to the prepared list, but it's going to happen, so just be ready for it with whatever answer suits you.

 

[Eilif]

I've not done alot of auditions (I tend to be choosy about groups I try out for and then stay with them for years). Maybe a dozen or so over the years. However, playing songs not previously requested is the norm in my experience. Most times, after playing the tunes that I was requested to learn the band leader will bring out a tune or two that weren't mentioned. Sometimes even without a chord sheet.

I actually look forward to it. As long as it's not too complex, relatively within the genre and especially if they provide a chord sheet, I'm pretty confident that I can lock in well enough with a good band to make a good impression and maybe even set my self apart from the herd.

In my last band EVERY GIG had songs pop up on the tablet that I'd never played before. That'll keep you on your toes!

I think it's a wise course of action to request this from prospective band members and really no different from attending an orchestral audition and being asked to sight-read something. They want to see how good you are on the fly and how good your ear is. Those are actual indicators of musicianship that have real application in a gigging situation. I might even go so far as to say if you have someone come in for an audition and you don't take the opportunity to drop them into a new tune you're wasting a chance to size up an important chunk of their musical ability.

 

[buldog5151bass]

Depends on the situation, but nothing wrong with checking out someone's ear, and how quickly they pick things up, especially if many of the songs on the audition list should be known already.

 

[pepj]

In musical situations, I'm looking at musical chemistry first and foremost so I dont much care about the getting the song bang on.
Assuming the only thing is familiarity and not being able to play the style, which you should have covered at the start, the groove and feel trumps notes.

So, I wouldn't care if they threw a few standards at me. I've heard a lot of stuff and can busk and make stuff work.
If that didn't go well, it probably isn't a good fit eitherway.

 

[WI Short Scaler]

My choice is not there in the poll. I would vote No but I'd give it me best shot.

This would have been my choice too.

But I voted "yes, but prefer not to"

It's been so long since I had an actual audition I'm just guessing though.

 

[Swerve]

I think it depends on the genre. Most bands I've played in (with one exception) the music and chord progressions are easy to pick up on the fly. The one exception they knew the music was very challenging and just wanted to see how I gelled with the group and knew I would learn the songs over time.

Since it's a cover band if you nailed the songs they asked you to prepare for I wouldn't worry about the jam session at the end. Probably just wanted to cut loose and have some fun since you were all already there.

 

[buldog5151bass]

Oh come on. How many here have been given set lists for an audition, and already knew half the tunes (or could re-learn them in one night)?

 

[Pacman]

The audition process is designed to find your strong and weak points. If I was auditioning someone, I'd like to (a) see how well they prepare, and (b) see how well they do on the fly or under pressure. This gives me a fuller picture of what I can expect from the candidate in the future. It's perfectly reasonable to expect this at auditions.

Find the snippet of an interview Steve Vai gave about auditioning for Zappa...

 

[El Thumpo]

Oh come on. How many here have been given set lists for an audition, and already knew half the tunes (or could re-learn them in one night)?

You're assuming cover bands. You're also assuming cover bands who play the songs exactly the way your old cover band (or the recording) did it, without accommodating for individual flourishes or version creep over time.

Even if the songs are familiar, I've found more often than not the lead singer has dropped a verse here and there, or the intro/outro is clipped, or the modulation in the bridge ain't there because it strains the range of someone in the band, etc. and if you're the one plowing ahead with the "correct" version, you're the one who sounds wrong.

When it comes to originals, I've learned not to trust the given lead sheets without first checking them with the music and revising/rewriting accordingly. The chords may be the chords when the guitarist is capoed, as opposed to the actual chords. The lyrics may have changed substantially. The instrumental breaks may not be there at all, because no one wrote them down since they don't have words. All in all, I approach audition playing like I do driving in a snowstorm—very cautiously.

 

[Keger Jupti]

The audition process is designed to find your strong and weak points. If I was auditioning someone, I'd like to (a) see how well they prepare, and (b) see how well they do on the fly or under pressure. This gives me a fuller picture of what I can expect from the candidate in the future. It's perfectly reasonable to expect this at auditions.

Find the snippet of an interview Steve Vai gave about auditioning for Zappa...

COMPLETELY agree! You get a much better idea of what the person is capable of.

Our current bandleader pulls this kinda stuff all the time. He just randomly throws a song out & says "Let's try it". Now, I might ask to give it a listen first, but I truly love seat-of-the-pants stuff. It does nothing but help me up my game. Playing on a worship team helps a lot in that regard, too. I'm playing 5-7 new songs every week, with just one run thru beforehand.

Think of it as an opportunity, rather than a bother?

 

[CPplaysBASS]

I said "no and won't" in the context of general "Dad cover bands" where there's a good chance they are setting a higher standard for who they are auditioning than they set for themselves.

It would just seem like a bandleader ego thing to me.Can they wing it on a song they don't know?

In a different context where it's a jazz band, or even a tribute to a rock band that is known to wing it on occasion, then fine. In that case though, you could kind of expect ahead of time that those types of bands will throw those curves (and many bands I know would simply state the need to improvise before the audition. If they don't, they are simply poor at planning).

Context is everything

 

[pepj]

If the song is happening...who cares about differing versions. That's just musical geography. You'd correct it after a qtr note anyway.
If you ploughed on not noticing, thats the bigger issue.

 

[fdeck]

Oddly enough a lot of jazz groups will "audition" a player by hiring them for a low profile gig when they need a sub. Those gigs are seldom rehearsed. I probably owe a lot of my work to those situations. But it's what we live for. My rule is "every gig is an audition."

At the same time, it's also a chance to audition a band. There are good and bad reasons for pulling a bassist into an un-rehearsed situation. The good reasons have to do with seeing how someone handles that situation, since gigs are seldom completely unpredictable. The bad reason is that many musicians have little or no idea what a bassist actually is or does, and may have worked with bassists who somehow took care of them. Another bad reason is simply ill-preparedness.

"Funny, our old bassist never had a problem with the bass part for that tune."

"That's because your old bassist wrote it."

 

[LBS-bass]

Even if the songs are familiar, I've found more often than not the lead singer has dropped a verse here and there, or the intro/outro is clipped, or the modulation in the bridge ain't there because it strains the range of someone in the band, etc. and if you're the one plowing ahead with the "correct" version, you're the one who sounds wrong.

Bands that do this to songs probably aren't bands I want to be in. If I can't optimize my practice time by learning from a recorded version and have to re-learn a song in rehearsals because someone can't remember the song forms, I'm likely to walk.

If the band is actually good, I might bring a recorder so that I have reference for their version but you've got to be a good band for that. I don't have a problem with purposefully making arrangement changes per se, but I have a big problem when those changes are there because people can't be bothered to learn the song well. That just points to a lot of inconsistency down the road with people dropping verses in weird places at random, and I'm saying no thanks to that kind of mess.

 

[trevcda]

Yes! And the turn it around and start playing YYZ or the bass solo from Freewill and tell them to "just follow all long, you'll get it!". Most of the time you'll get a blank stare. But once in awhile they'll actually know it.

 

[40Hz]

I've had it happen and enjoyed the challenge. But I come out of an IT troubleshooting background where you're often dealing with a tight deadline and incomplete information. But despite that, you'll still be expected to deliver a solution. In that environment, the ability to remain effective - even when you don't completely know what you're doing - is a good indicator of your level of professionalism. And the ability to turn on a dime is a valuable skill to have.

I put a high value on flexibility. So I don't think it's completely unreasonable to expect an auditioning musician to show some competence in jamming along with an unfamiliar song or two following their prepared tunes. It's a good indication of the player's degree of experience and musicality IMO. It weeds out "the paint by numbers" "learned it off the record" players pretty quickly.