Double Bass Encourage creativity?

[Groove Doctor]

:thumbup:

 

[Marc Piane]

Lots of great advice here and it sounds like you have already put quite a bit of solid thought into it as well. I think you are totally on the right track.

One thing that can sometimes shake things up is to get an outside voice to offer some ideas. For example if there is a local heavy that everyone respects maybe you can hire them to come in a do a 1 hour master class with the group. Sometimes that can give you guys all some ideas or ways of looking at things that you hadn't thought about and you can refer back to as the group evolves.

 

[Tom Lane]

... get an outside voice to offer some ideas. For example if there is a local heavy that everyone respects ...

That's an excellent idea, and actually, I've done that before with earlier incarnations of the band. The time when it worked is when, as you say, everyone in the band respected the mentor. If one player's not on board, it doesn't work, the 2nd time I had a mentor in.
I'll have to give that idea some thought for the current band because I'm not sure who they'd all respect and I think they may feel that they've got their path set and won't value suggestions. I will give it some serious consideration. Thanks for the suggestion.

 

[Groove Doctor]

Have asked each member individually the key questions:

How have you grown as a player recently - within the band? in personal practice/lessons?
Any specific goals or areas you want to develop?

What do you enjoy most about this band?
If you could change one thing, what would that be?


A bit like a coach getting to know his players, guiding them and getting the best out of them. Be willing to share your answers too.

 

[Tom Lane]

A few years ago, I noticed that players tend to fall into one of three camps: play-mores, students, and pros. The labels aren't quite what you'd expect, but try to suggest the approach that the players have towards music. For instance, students don't need to be enrolled, they're just always searching for information and like to experiment, perhaps wasting time to explore ideas. Play-mores are satisfied with their own playing, don't practice, aren't typically into exploring things and just want to *play-more*. Pros are in it for the money. No hearty pay-check, no play. Some musicians go back and forth depending on the circumstances, wanting to get paid to play with local level players but happily sitting in for free in NYC. Some want to get paid but like to explore new things. Play mores will take the pay-check when they can but are mostly interested in just doing what they do without any motivation for growth.
Right now, using these labels, my band consists of two students, one play-more, and one guy too new to me to know. The play-more is the drummer who's more than competent for the music we play, solos well, listens great, responds, good dynamics, solid, strong time, loves to improvise, great attitude, on-time. He just doesn't practice so his technique has stopped developing. He grumbles periodically about his not practicing, but the reality is that he does not make the time. You see why I need to consider the idea of bringing a mentor into this. I need to get to know the sax player better.

 

[Sam Sherry]

One thing that can sometimes shake things up is to get an outside voice to offer some ideas. For example if there is a local heavy that everyone respects maybe you can hire them to come in a do a 1 hour master class with the group.

Marc, that's an extremely constructive idea, but I always used that same money to hire the heavy for a rehearsal and a gig. The result is probably less helpful coaching but, if your ears are open, more helpful ass-kicking.

 

[Groove Doctor]

^^ VERY insightful and very helpful, thanks tcl.

Our singer and drummer left last year (play-mores aka gig-mores) because we didn't gig enough. We didn't gig bc we sounded sloppy at rehearsals bc they didn't practice.

Best thing they ever did!! Now we have a drummer that also sings who is a keen 'student' just like keys player, part-time guitarist, and myself.

Now to look for a 'student' sax or horn player to supplement our 'play-when-I'm-not-busy-with-family' sax player.

 

[Tom Lane]

I do find it challenging finding players I like to play with when little money is involved. Too many barely competent gig-mores. And it can be frustrating if you're a student among play-mores/gig-mores. Bored much? Vice-versa, I think students are a constant thorn in the gig-mores side because we want to rehearse and explore new tunes and new ways of doing old tunes. Students want to rehearse more, perform less. Gig-mores want to rehearse less and gig more. At the end of the day, there are more reasons NOT to play with another player than there are reasons TO play with them.

 

[Tom Lane]

Marc, that's an extremely constructive idea, but I always used that same money to hire the heavy for a rehearsal and a gig. The result is probably less helpful coaching but, if your ears are open, more helpful ass-kicking.

You sound like my teacher, Sam. He's ALWAYS kicking my a$$ to transcribe and do more than I can before our next lesson. Honestly, that's one of the things I like about him. He sets the bar high which I appreciate. The downside to hiring the heavy weight that I've encountered is that while it's definitely helpful and gets everyone to up their game on that gig, it doesn't last with some players and they just slip back into their comfortable habits after the a$$-kicking is over. Maybe I need to keep hiring the heavy weight? But in a way that's no fun either, because you know it's just a mercy-gig for them and they're just doing it for the money. It usually shows. They don't really want to be there. I think I'd rather work with a collaborator than a mercenary.

 

[Tom Lane]

Update: held the gig last night and I'm happy to report that simple arrangements and devices I lined up worked very well. it pushed the band to increase their energy and get more outside of themselves and even the audience responded very well. I'll check to see if the recording came out and post if so. Thanks again for all the great advice!

 

[Groove Doctor]

 

[Huy Nguyen]

Just had a really great gig over the weekend. I think the best motivator to challenge guys to play more creatively is to simply cater to their passions. The hard part is to steer it well so that it comes out as music and not a bunch of guys just running through licks and turning it into a practice session.

Eventually, you'll get to the point where you find guys who play Music (with the capital M) and those are the ones you hang on to. They'll probably also be the ones that consider money as secondary thing. IMO, if they're grumpy about not getting paid well they're not innit for the Music and probably consider playing with you a chore, either that or they're super good and should be respectfully compensated.

 

[Tom Lane]

It's those really fun gigs that keep us coming back, isn't it?

I think there's a balance the BL needs to strike between boring the players and over-whelming them. No one plays well on tunes that are too hard for them but it's hard to get into it when you've played a simple, do-nothing tune the same way too many times too.

I guess there's different schools of thought on selecting band mates. There's the *best of the best* idea that would suggest getting the very best players you can. Even in business I find that philosophy lacking because you tend to wind up with a bunch of prima donnas who don't play together. I've found it best to get competent players who are all pretty close in ability, then mistakes tend to be forgiven and the camaraderie is good.

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

Regarding bandmates: I solved this by redefining "best" for my purposes. To me at this point, the "best" players are the ones i have the most fun playing with because they play with you and off you instead of treating the rhythm section like a playalong recording. My good friend Corey Christiansen summed this up nicely by making a distinction between who he plays "with" versus who he plays "for". Many times, the big name players are guys who expect you to play "for" them. Personally, I'd rather play with people.

 

[M0ses]

It's those really fun gigs that keep us coming back, isn't it?

I think there's a balance the BL needs to strike between boring the players and over-whelming them. No one plays well on tunes that are too hard for them but it's hard to get into it when you've played a simple, do-nothing tune the same way too many times too.

I guess there's different schools of thought on selecting band mates. There's the *best of the best* idea that would suggest getting the very best players you can. Even in business I find that philosophy lacking because you tend to wind up with a bunch of prima donnas who don't play together. I've found it best to get competent players who are all pretty close in ability, then mistakes tend to be forgiven and the camaraderie is good.

I agree with Chris here: players that are so convinced that they are ALL THAT that they can't collaborate in a group properly wouldn't make it onto my list of good players in the first place.

My current main group (I'm not BL though) has a very wide range of abilities: the guitarist is crazy competent with a well tuned ear, I am solid but my ear isn't quite good enough to always catch where he is going. The keyboard player is a beginner relative to us, and the drummer is a fine musician but doesn't have much experience in jazz. I think this ends up giving us an interesting perspective because we are all drawing motivation from different places.