• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Audition process pet peeve

Do you expect to be put on the spot at an audition and play songs you don't know?

  • Yes, but I prefer not to.

    Votes: 134 47.9%
  • No, and I will not.

    Votes: 48 17.1%
  • Yes, and I enjoy the process

    Votes: 98 35.0%

  • Total voters
    280
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."

Great post. Let me add to every gig is an audition. So is every rehearsal, recording session, every set up/tear down, and just hanging with the band.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sears and fdeck
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.
It certainly seems pointless if the band is the type that does predetermined set lists (or "shows", as the kids these days call them).
However, if the band plays in places that have regulars that expect to hear "their" song (and will tip for the extra service), it makes sense to see if the bass player can hang in enough on tunes he doesn't know to get that $20 in the tip jar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LBS-bass
We auditioned guitarists recently and did exactly that. We played through all the songs we'd asked for the audition and the guy was such a pleasure to play with it we just wanted to play more tunes with him. It wasn't any sort of test of his ability to play along unrehearsed, we just wanted to keep playing with him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joebone
Yeah, and I enjoy it for the most part unless I absolutely can't hang. However, that would only happen if there were specific parts I needed to play at specific times in a complex arrangement with rhythm, meter, and key changes. For most band music, you can get away with a lot on bass.

Sometimes you can even run through a song more than once. The first time, you'll miss stuff, but the second time, it'll be a lot more solid. (This can actually happen within the same song, honestly, since a lot of stuff just gets repeated.)
 
My choice is not there in the poll. I would vote No but I'd give it me best shot.
Typical with polls, my choice is not one of the options so the premise is, well it just sucks. But for the purpose of the thread, I would do my best to prepare and play whatever else was thrown at me as best I could if I wanted the gig.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FunkHead
I'd gauge the bandleader closely to see if they really wanted to find out how adaptable I am vs enjoying putting someone in a difficult position for their entertainment.

The more helpful they are with the unfamiliar songs, the more likely I am to think they just wanna run thru some stuff and see if I can hang (and that also tells me that they have some idea how to run the band); if they refuse to help, then that's a red flag that they're either somewhat sadistic or horrifically incompetent. Just one criterion, but a good one for me.

Either way, I'll try my best. And I'm pretty damn good at rocking on the fly, so in my own experience, the result is more dependent on how the auditor handles things than how I do. If they fail, then they won't see me again.
 
Spent a decade in a band that got its start playing a weekly open mic residency where we hosted a long series of players who would bring their best (or only) two or three songs to the event and expect us to back them.

Maybe half of the time one or two of us would know a particular request. The other half none of us knew or even heard. But never turned anyone down, and after that got around to the local musicians we never had a shortage of people tossing weird or profoundly obscure songs at us. In the early going it was more than a bit messy.

It was messy, sometimes painful, but also occasionally transcendent. After a year of that, we gradually turned into a hive mind because we learned the hard way to listen to and read each other’s musical minds.

So, no, it wouldn’t bother me to wing a complete unknown at an audition. Quite the opposite, because I love to do it and it’s a great way to take the measure of a new group. Everyone knowing a song note for note is nice, and comfortable, but to my mind it’s much more telling to get a quick read on how well that group watches and listens and thinks collectively on its feet.

With enough time and practice, anyone can learn a given song. But musical telepathy is another level.
 
Huge difference between playing the notes and playing the song.
If you dep well, you'll get calls and be expected to play standards at the gig. You may never have met some players before you start.
You are expected to make sense of the song and the trick is that no one out front notices.

Empathy and flexibility are the key so if the band can't do that, and make well known songs work in a single pass, then are they band you wang to join.

I actually don't know who does auditions these days and unless you are in a totally new region, you know people who know people and they just want to meet you and see what the chemistry is like. They've taken a referral as 'of the right standard' so the playing part is sorted.
 
I’m seeing a lot of bass machismo in this thread. As if it’s a given that a.) playing music means playing standards, b.) playing well = being able to play anything, and c.) that throwing random songs at someone is a valid test of musicianship.

I back up a lot of singer-songwriters. I work hard to realize their vision, which sometimes means something more than the most obvious jump-in-and-play-by-ear choices. Their songs aren’t familiar standards, and often quirky in their own way. My attunement is to their individuality, which perhaps means my ear isn’t as well-honed as other players.

I recently had a successful audition with an all-original band, anchored by an incredibly talented singer-songwriter. I showed up ready to play four of their songs, one of which was a song in development which allowed me to demonstrate my original bassline writing skills. If they had broken into a jam or Mustang Sally, I’d have been annoyed: that’s not what I was there for. Different music, different demands, folks.
 
"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."

Because assuming you have the technical chops anyone can take a song home and learn it for the next audition. But some bands (inc mine, at least pre-covid) take very short-term, short-notice jobs as backing bands for lead vocalists. For situations like this it's not only important *if* you can learn a song but also how you learn and how fast you pick material up. Also how you respond to things going a bit off track. I understand how trying to pickup unfamiliar material on the fly in front of strangers can be unnerving, but that *might* be what they're trying to test. From your point of view, you get to test the band on how they react to your best effort and whether their expectations align with yours.

Having said that, I think it would only be fair *before* the audition to tell you the material they want you to prepare, and then mention that they would like to throw some stuff at you on the fly. Then you get to make an informed decision about whether this audition is something for you or not.
 
In the last ten years most of my auditioning has been at the first gig. Most of the time it went well but sometimes not so much when the songs start in different keys without me knowing they changed them. These are not high-profile gigs fortunately. I don’t see high-profile gigs having you audition songs they didn’t tell you to learn.

I’ve been on gigs where the better musicians turned down songs because they didn’t want to hack about. Didn’t bother me at all. I should learn to “Just Say No” when I don’t have a clue rather than forge ahead unknowingly but when it works it can turn out to be one of the most fulfilling part of the gig.
 
My last audition was with a drummer and guitarist that didn't even have any songs. The drummer was late and needed a half-hour smoke break as soon as he got there. I brought one of my songs, a 170bpm 12 bar. The guitarist twiddled all the way through like it were a 3-minute lead break. We made up a backing track that he twiddled through for 10 minutes. I don't think he played 1 chord in an hour. I left after the hour; a phone call to my favourite woman was a much better thought.

I'd rather have an audition like yours. All that band needs is some leadership.
 
Another consideration is song requests at a gig. Some bands just flat out say "NO!" which is one way to handle it...but I have played many gigs where we get a request and power through even if everyone in the band does not know the tune, and it goes over really well. Often times the response to a request is..."Sure we will, just put some $$ in the tip jar!" I think many people appreciate the flexibility and spontaneity. That could be one reason for this to come up at an audition.
 
I’m seeing a lot of bass machismo in this thread. As if it’s a given that a.) playing music means playing standards, b.) playing well = being able to play anything, and c.) that throwing random songs at someone is a valid test of musicianship

Don’t know about playing standards. It’s not something I’ve ever done a lot of outside my early jazz years.

However, as to your other two arguments, I’ll have to disagree with your characterization. Because it’s not about being macho at all.

Being knowledgeable enough, musically educated enough, and skilled enough to minimally handle a song you don’t know being thrown at you is basic musicianship. Especially considering how most songs aren’t exactly models of originality. There’s a plenty of recycled themes and melodic progressions that crop up repeatedly in popular music genres. Recognizing and being able to use them comes with experience. And that’s a major part of the difference between being some guy who’s memorized a bunch of songs, and being an actual musician.

I’ve run into far too many players who have memorized a songbook worth of material. They can play the recorded arrangements note for note and pride themselves on it. But let a singer ask them to drop a song down half a step because their voice is getting tired, or to stretch the song out to fill the extra two minutes needed to finish out a full set and they fall apart. Then they cop an attitude about it because the simple fact of the matter is - they can’t.

So who’s really getting all macho about things? The band who asked someone to show what they can do? Or the guy who’s getting all bent out of shape and feeling insulted about it because the band is looking for someone who can do more than karaoke?