Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
DRUGS & BOOZE
- Thread starter bassfrenzie
- Start date
Rickett Customs
Commercial User
Drugs and booze are a thing of the past for me, besides, I have more fun playing sober anyway. Well that and It looks much better when I go out and sub/session as well.
Rickett Customs
Commercial User
Wait a minute... didn't Metallica "make it?" Some of their best music, IMO, was from the period where they were lovingly referred to as Alcoholica. They stopped drinking and playing.... and next thing you know, everyone gets a Load of St. Anger on 'em.
I think the timeline when Metallica made it, [IMO] was more widely accepted (Almost every body was partying then) then and maybe not so much these days [/IMO], but,even they sobered up too.Some people are gonna feel they gotta grow up sooner or later, I suppose.
Drugs & Booze, do one thing.
Inpeed, you brain from working right.
If your serious about your music.?
You will play better when your sober.
You don't get drunk at work, do you?
Some bands take the business seriously, and they're usually the one that survives.
really? manson, NIN, slipknot, Korn, foo fighters, rhcp, metallica (i'm sure they still party it up), mudvayne...
seem to be doing well
"clean" non survivors: backstreet boys, n' sync,
"clean" current popular bands
emo
hell, if that's the case, give me a beer and smoke, now!
What kinda music you guys play? When I was in a jam-band I'd get stoned out of my mind before, after and sometimes during the set. Didn't matter, we'd play through it.
Now that I'm in a more "precise" rock band where we have to keep our on-stage energy up through the whole 45 minute set, no smokin the herbs til after the gig. 1-3 beers before the gig never hurt anyone though, unless you just can't handle your beers.
Now that I'm in a more "precise" rock band where we have to keep our on-stage energy up through the whole 45 minute set, no smokin the herbs til after the gig. 1-3 beers before the gig never hurt anyone though, unless you just can't handle your beers.
i play reggae, so really we just smoke to smoke and dont think about it, doesn't effect us.
if anything we will fudge up if we ain't had our herbs LOL. Dunno Sometimes we hit the bong and just start jamming some awesome **** and no one is bitching or complaining everyone locks in 
If someone wants to get stoned just because he enjoys being stoned, on a purely recreational basis, that's one thing. I've been there. I know how much fun it was.
But getting stoned in order to compensate for one's shyness and inhibition, or to compensate for one's nervousness, doesn't address the core issue. A real performer doesn't have to use drugs as a crutch. If you've got the groove inside of you in the first place, then you shouldn't have to rely upon substances to gain access to it.
As far as alcohol is concerned, there's not a single thing it'll do for you - other than interfere with the proper functioning of your central nervous system, resulting in physical incoordination, slurred speech, fumbling, stumbling, etc. etc. What a mess!
Alcohol and musicianship simply don't go together at all...
MM
"Any musician who says he is playing better on tea, the needle, or when he is juiced, is a plain, straight liar. When I get too much to drink I can't even finger well, let alone play decent ideas. And, in the days when I was on the stuff, I may have thought I was playing better, but listening to some of the records now, I know I wasn't. Some of these smart kids who think you have to be completely knocked out to be a good hornman are just plain crazy. It isn't true. I know, believe me."
Charlie Parker, 1949 (and he knew the truth of this all too well)
Now I'm waiting for the first "Who's Charlie Parker?"...
Charlie Parker, 1949 (and he knew the truth of this all too well)
Now I'm waiting for the first "Who's Charlie Parker?"...
If someone wants to get stoned just because he enjoys being stoned, on a purely recreational basis, that's one thing. I've been there. I know how much fun it was.
But getting stoned in order to compensate for one's shyness and inhibition, or to compensate for one's nervousness, doesn't address the core issue. A real performer doesn't have to use drugs as a crutch. If you've got the groove inside of you in the first place, then you shouldn't have to rely upon substances to gain access to it.
As far as alcohol is concerned, there's not a single thing it'll do for you - other than interfere with the proper functioning of your central nervous system, resulting in physical incoordination, slurred speech, fumbling, stumbling, etc. etc. What a mess!
Alcohol and musicianship simply don't go together at all...
MM
I understand the spirit of your comments, but you lose me when you make sweeping statements like;
and
As long as you are only speaking for yourself, these statements are perfectly fine. When you start declaring these statements to be absolute truths - that the way drugs and alcohol fit into your life is the same as how it fits into other people's lives - you step out of bounds.
The way drugs and alcohol affect you and your ability to perform you role in your musical endeavors is not the same for other people. So you cannot make a statement like "Alcohol and musicianship don't go together..." WITHOUT adding "for me".
Further,
Again, for you. It may for them. You don't know.
In your opinion. Some great performers do indeed use drugs and alcohol in the pursuit of their craft. It's not your thing, but that doesn't mean it's not or shouldn't be anyone else's.
In your opinion. You see, had you included these little "in my opinion" comments, your sweeping overgeneralized absolutes would not be as such. They'd be you expressing your feelings about how use of mind-altering substances impacts your ability to perform as a musician. Deciding the way it impacts you is how it impacts everyone is just plain wrong.
A simple question: what is more important- drugs / booze or music?
The music is what gets you high......
The music is what gets you high......
Yeah, sorry man but +1
I got the groove and I got the chops, but that doesnt do anything for my anxiety level. I certainly dont consider it a crutch and Im sure MOST of us posting here can play just fine without alcohol or other, but choose to loosen up a little before doing so sometimes.
for the original poster (if he made it this far):
to me the question is do your singer and guitarist look like drunk jackasses to the audience? Many of the things that mistakes bug you can go unnoticed to the average audience. Although in the singers case, that's probably getting noticed.
To me it's about having enough respect for the audience to perform well, and moderating your intake to allow that.
Beyond the audience at practice/rehearsal, my experience has been that sober practice/rehearsal gets you to your musical goals effectively while non-sober practice/rehearsal tend to be aimless fun.
to me the question is do your singer and guitarist look like drunk jackasses to the audience? Many of the things that mistakes bug you can go unnoticed to the average audience. Although in the singers case, that's probably getting noticed.
To me it's about having enough respect for the audience to perform well, and moderating your intake to allow that.
Beyond the audience at practice/rehearsal, my experience has been that sober practice/rehearsal gets you to your musical goals effectively while non-sober practice/rehearsal tend to be aimless fun.
* sigh*
You may feel that my point of view is overly absolutist. I would respectfully suggest that yours is unjustifiably relativistic.
I refuse to tiptoe on eggshells here, with an "IME" or an "IMO" inserted into every other sentence. It should be understood that I'm speaking for myself here.
That said, using substances in order to compensate for some perceived personal deficiency is in fact a form of dysfunctional behavior - and I know from experience about that too. It's not just my opinion. It's well-established, well-documented, psychotherapeutic common knowledge.
Likewise with the physiological effects of alcohol upon the central nervous system - and the obvious and dramatic ways in which it degenerates the physical coordination necessary to perform music at a high level of skill. The voluminous medical evidence here is so overwhelmingly conclusive, it could scarcely be less subject to debate.
This isn't to say that there haven't been many great performers who managed to perform magnificently while drunk, stoned, or both. But likely they were able to do so in spite of being drunk/stoned - not because of it...
Sorry to be so politically incorrect, boys and girls. But I gotta calls 'em as I sees 'em. In the long run, the brutal truth is always the best way to go...
MM
Drugs and booze are so friggin' passé. It gets really tiring after you've sent your third or fourth bandmate through intervention. Gad.
Then, not only do you have to deal with the bf/gf drama after he's C&S, but you have to attend all these meetings in support of his efforts. Real fun.
Personally, I stopped getting FU at gigs 'cause after awhile I found I liked my playing better straight than when I was altered. It's almost like being stoned was holding my creative spirit back instead of enhancing it. It had kind of run it's course of being useful anymore. But that's just me - YMMV.
I know cats who can still play well all messed up - doesn't bother me in the least.
I know cats who start sounding funky after one beer - that bothers me.
It's my butt up there too, fool.
Then, not only do you have to deal with the bf/gf drama after he's C&S, but you have to attend all these meetings in support of his efforts. Real fun.
Personally, I stopped getting FU at gigs 'cause after awhile I found I liked my playing better straight than when I was altered. It's almost like being stoned was holding my creative spirit back instead of enhancing it. It had kind of run it's course of being useful anymore. But that's just me - YMMV.
I know cats who can still play well all messed up - doesn't bother me in the least.
I know cats who start sounding funky after one beer - that bothers me.
It's my butt up there too, fool.
I think this is the natural progression of musicians and weed. I still have a puff here and there during a practices and gigs, but not cheech and chong proportions.
I learned long ago that booze and music only go hand and hand when the boozer is the listener.
MysticMichael said:
But you're not.
MysticMichael said:
and
MysticMichael said:
This is not speaking for yourself. These comments, along with many others, are very absolute and leave no room for alternative points of view.
Again, I am not purposefully being combative here. I am trying to open up the possibility that while it may be true for many (clearly for you), that use of drugs and alcohol do not factor favorably into their ability to perform or be musicians, it's not that way for everybody. Declaring that "real musicians don't [fill in the blank]" is an absolute statement, absolutely.
Look, I've seem my share of folks who cannot do their job. I've even concluded that if they'd stop getting stoned, tweaked, ganked, yahoo'd, whatever, they'd stand a better chance at doing their job. I've also seem plenty of top-notch, grade A, full-on musicians who can down significant amounts of [blank] and give you the show of a lifetime.
I personally can't - but just because I can't doesn't lead me to believe that no one can.
I particularly like the relativistic opinions expressed, e.g. "It's not your place to decide what's right or wrong for others, only you"
This is correct, to a point. If you get inebriated / high at a gig / rehearsal, there is a good probability that you will drive home afterwards. Having drunken / high individuals behind the wheels of motor vehicles & others personal safety might be at risk is EXACTLY when a relativistic opinion does not work. You (in the general sense) might have played the best show of your life, but none of that matters if an accident does occur. When your own behavior affects another person or people, relativistic morality doesn't hold up too well, and thankfully, we have laws and systems to enforce them.
That said, I enjoy a couple of beers while playing, but not enough to impair my driving. I have far too much to lose to get a DUI or harm someone else (my job, all my money, my life, etc.), so it isn't worth it.
imp
This is correct, to a point. If you get inebriated / high at a gig / rehearsal, there is a good probability that you will drive home afterwards. Having drunken / high individuals behind the wheels of motor vehicles & others personal safety might be at risk is EXACTLY when a relativistic opinion does not work. You (in the general sense) might have played the best show of your life, but none of that matters if an accident does occur. When your own behavior affects another person or people, relativistic morality doesn't hold up too well, and thankfully, we have laws and systems to enforce them.
That said, I enjoy a couple of beers while playing, but not enough to impair my driving. I have far too much to lose to get a DUI or harm someone else (my job, all my money, my life, etc.), so it isn't worth it.
imp
