How to Succeed as an Original Band

[TRichardsbass]

But I like music because I want to make music, not to impress the crowd
I'd rather have songs noone likes but I can proudly say "that's my/our stuff and I can proudly put my name on it", than to play music the masses like but I feel ashamed or uncomfortable in. If you don't belive in yourself, noone else will.

WARNING: What I am about to say is my opinion, and it is not intended to be personal to you. So please don't take it as a personal attack, as it is not meant for you personally.

If you want to stay true to yourself, you have a garage or basement for that. I know lots of guys who believe in themselves and play for hours in their homes everyday. And they have never and will never see the inside of any pub, club or local fair.

Anyone who plays out and wants to play out is fooling themselves, IMHO, if they believe its all about themselves and their music. The whole idea of playing out is for people to hear your music and appreciate your music. Its to feel and receive the feedback and emotion of the crowd. And if they aren't liking it or don't get it, then you've missed the mark. I don't care how great you may think you are (and I've had some huge ego moments myself) if the crowd doesn't think so, then your poop stinks.

I understand the dseire to do "your" stuff. You can still do that AND play to a crowd. I learned a long time ago, if you have a really great ballad and the crowd yawns, turn it into something more upbeat and peppy and often things change for the better.

I think the movie "That Thing You Do" is a perfect example. The leader wrote this sappy ballad, and no one, including the band, liked it that way. The new drummer speeds it up and it becomes a huge, national hit. The leader winds up leaving because he wants to be true to his ego and believes he's bigger then what they created. But, he is not.

I have a friend who is constantly wondering why his Boston flavored "intellindie" music that he books at the local biker dive never goes over well and can't understand why the bar is always empty on his nights. Well, if you are gonna play Blake Babies at a bar where they are looking for Rolling Stones meet the Allmans, well...

Its my opinion, and after all, this is about being successful, not just playing music for the love of it. I'd love to hear what others think about my thoughts in this answer.

 

[KingRazor]

That makes perfect sense to me, Tom.

Basically, know your audience.

 

[kombi]

If you want to stay true to yourself, you have a garage or basement for that. I know lots of guys who believe in themselves and play for hours in their homes everyday. And they have never and will never see the inside of any pub, club or local fair.

Anyone who plays out and wants to play out is fooling themselves, IMHO, if they believe its all about themselves and their music. The whole idea of playing out is for people to hear your music and appreciate your music. Its to feel and receive the feedback and emotion of the crowd. And if they aren't liking it or don't get it, then you've missed the mark. I don't care how great you may think you are (and I've had some huge ego moments myself) if the crowd doesn't think so, then your poop stinks.

I actually don't have a huge ego, or think I'm "super awesome". I think I'm a good player with some technical problems, no more no less. There are a trazillion better players out there who are better than me - but also a trazillion worse. Feedback is actually VERY important for me. I just couldn't play country, when I want to play Ska, you know? Couldn't put my heart into it, not even for money...

Its my opinion, and after all, this is about being successful, not just playing music for the love of it. I'd love to hear what others think about my thoughts in this answer.

Every critic is welcome for me. Thanks for your opinion, I will think about that!

 

[TRichardsbass]

Today's nugget: Yes, age matters. Like size, only the women won't tell you. As for music, I will.

In another thread here it was mentioned that if you are over 30 and trying to do the original thing, don't. I'm going to sorta agree here.

One of the biggest reasons for going the original route is to strive to become that next U2, Beatles, Clash, whatever. That is was and for the most part will always be the norm and expected in this biz. Susan Boyle the exception, but if you don't have that movement by the time you hit your late 20's success as an original artist clearly is not in your favor.

I talk about my colleague Bruce Springsteen a lot, and this is a great case here. While everyone talks about how he didn't become huge until he was 27, nearly 28, he released his first major label album in 1973, at a time when he was 24. That's not really that old. And between the age of 24 and 27 he released three albums. Back in the day it was normal to release and album a year, maybe even two. Now, with the way most musicians do things, you get an album at best every other year. So do the math. If you put out your first recorded piece at the age of 22, then most likely you won't release another until you are 25, and if those don't work you will be lost to everyone but the locals.

Success as an original band requires youth. As a bass player in an original band, we get a little slack, as we can be the ultimate sideman at an older age and still fit in with the band. But if you want to be the front man or near that, the older you get, they just take you less and less seriously. Bill Wyman was nearly six years older then Mic and Keith when he was in the band. No one looked at him that way, probably because he wasn't the prime suspect.

So I will agree, that success as an original artist is not really gonna hit the older you get. That does not mean you can't be like Joe Grushecky and the House Rockers, who have managed to make a living playing originals at a much more advanced stage, thanks to his friendship with B. Springsteen, but you probably aren't gonna be the next GaGa.

 

[TRichardsbass]

Just got home this morning from a fill in gig with a band in CT. Got to watch drama unfold like a bad documentary channel show. That is the spawn of today's thought.

Most bands should actually define the off stage roles of each band member. It may not seem that obvious, but you really need a consistent face and message, as you never know who or what may be lurking.

Tonights drama, simplified, was that two different members of the band told a reporter for a local rag two completely different stories about the band, and one threw up, almost right on the reporter. I have never witnessed the aftermath quite like this one before. The reporter left, and I'm sure there won't be a good review, and the band had no clue how to handle it. I'll give them some tips when they are awake and sober later.

Either way, this is why everyone gets a public face and role. First, everyone in the band shoudl be defined. The cool one, the funny one, the quiet one, the smart one, you get it. When you are in public as a band you have to play those roles to the T. Then, each one of you has to have a role when it comes to speaking in public. There should be a main person for speaking to reporters and label guys, and should anyone in the band be approached you get those reporters to that guy (or gal). You can have two if you like, sort of like the Rolling Stones have used Mick and Keith together for all interviews and when talking business to the record companies. Even in that set up, each of you has a role. One guy is the straight guy, one the comedian or the wizard. Everyone else in the band must have the same story and lines. When approached, for example, about how the band formed, you all should have the same story, a brief one, and then point them to the public face to continue.

In my band Tom Richard's Rockets I actually was not the public face. I was the sarcastic side guy. Whenever there were industry or news people out, the story was that I founded the band because I was looking for a new direction and had tired of the spotlight. Then no matter what they would be brought to or speak with my guitar player, who would act as an interview front man, even though I was the singer, songwriter, bass player and manager of the band. He was much better at playing it straight then I was. Also, when they asked me a question it gave me the opportunity to give the whitty, sometimes sarcastic punch-line answer and get laughs. The drummer and rhythm guitarist NEVER gave interviews or said anything more about the band then a couple of lines and then find us or send reporters to us.

You see it all the time in the huge bands, and if you look back on their origins it was like that from the beginning. With the Beatles it was always John, then Paul, and George and Ringo, even though they were at the table, never said much. Bono and the Edge ARE the face of U2. Mick and Keith. Mike Love held that role for the Beach Boys for a long time, even though Brian Wilson was the Beach Boys. You get it in regular industries too. Wozniak and O'Brien were the real brains behind Apple and Microsoft, but the faces were Jobs and Gates. It worked, didn't it? Yep.

Even if you are just a band of 17 year olds starting out, you have to do this if you plan on having a career doing music.

That's my idea this morning. Oh, and one last thing, if you are going to drink a lot, make sure you hide backstage when important people are there. then, you are only throwing up on or in front of yourself....

 

[sandmangeck]

I didn't read through the entire thread. What is everyones def. of success as a musician?

 

[TRichardsbass]

I didn't read through the entire thread. What is everyones def. of success as a musician?

There have been several side trips in the thread about that. While success is relative to the musician, the goal of this thread was for people who wanted to do original music and be able to do it as their primary living, or have a successful band and become a mega band.

That doesn't mean if you have played all the famous clubs but never made a penny you weren't successful, as your goal may have been to do only that. But what I'm focused on here is propelling people to be able to do original music as a primary living or original music only as a living. Or, at worst case, being able to make enough doing original music to allow you to keep doing original music based on the money you make doing the music.

Hope that gives you my perspective.

 

[TRichardsbass]

Good Morning everyone! Yesterday I took part in a workshop for songwriters that really made me think. I suggest everyone do something like that to keep your skills sharp and to learn something new.

What I gleaned yesterday was the phrase, "Do The Work." The workshop leader threw that out, and many of the would be songwriters there just looked at him. Then, he took them through a free writing exercise, and then told them that if they did that every day for at least 15 minutes, they would find some inspiration. And then he told them that the rest of the work would follow, but that getting started was 90% of the battle. And he is right.

For and original band, you must do the work. Everyday. That means something for the band, everyday. I would suggest a half hour, but even 15 minutes works. What could you do in 15 minutes?

1. Twitter news about the band and update on your next appearance or gig.
2. Do an email blast about the band or shows.
3. Update your Facebook page or website with something for your fans.
4. Do a free writing exercise to get ideas for a new song.
5. Call, email or write to a local promoter or club for a gig.
6. Practice a new song.
7. Balance the band checkbook.

I think you all understand. So, get out there and "Do The Work." Nothing else is as simple or as powerful.

 

[TRichardsbass]

Okay, so no one adding any new commentary? Remember, this aint a sticky anymore...

 

[Holdsg]

we've all been too busy writing new original material

 

[Queg]

Hey folks.

Just discovered this thread.. I really should be doing more lurking here as opposed to the equipment forums lol.

While I agree with most of the advice above, I'd be wary of being too pre-meditated regarding band member roles, personalities, and responsibilities.. let them develop organically, over time you can recognize and acknowledge them, as opposed to assigning them. In my view, much of the "magic" of original bands comes from not over-thinking this stuff too much.

The "Do the Work" list should be a sticky.

 

[jmattbassplaya]

I'm sure this has been mentioned before, but I'll throw it in for the sake of continuing discussion.

An important thing to learn is how to be a vital and important band member in the band you're in. Often times (and I see this A LOT on TB) a bassist will be cut from a group and they won't understand why. They'll argue that they always arrived on time to rehearsals, they came knowing their parts, they didn't start drama, and they always helped with load-in and load-out.

While that's all fine and good, it's simply not enough to justify your inclusion in a band that's trying to go places. Make yourself useful in other ways. Become your bands webmaster, make phone calls to venues to help book gigs, learn how to run sound, learn how to sing or play another instrument like synth (a good choice given the current trends in pop music), learn how to do setups for every instrument in the band and help out when someone needs assistance, etc... These sorts of things don't take too much time to learn how to do, and they can seriously increase your worth.

At the end of the day, however, even learning an additional trade in your band still might not be enough. Sometimes personalities simply don't match as well as your fellow band mates might like. That said, there are a few things you can do that can make your personality hard to resist... or replace:

1. Don't have an ego. It's one thing to be confident in your abilities and your band, but it's something else entirely when you're constantly talking yourself up and putting others down. It's not an attractive trait or one people want to be around.
2. Be gracious. Be thankful for your band, your gear, and all the good things in your life. It seems silly, but those good thoughts and feelings really do radiate off of you and onto those around you. It makes you an attractive person to be around.
3. Don't be a Debbie Downer. It sucks having to wake up early for recording dates, and it sucks having to do load-out at 3am, but please keep it to yourself. No one needs to be reminded why things suck. It helps no one and only increases bad vibes.
4. Be positive. Be a yes man. If you're happy-go-lucky people will respond much more positively to you. If it's obvious you're willing to work with people, they'll just as likely be willing to work with you.
5. Be supportive. Be there for your band mates. If they're having a bad day at a rehearsal don't taunt them or make them feel worse than they already do. Talk them up and show some love. They'll return the favor when you're having a bad day, too.

 

[David Jayne]

I'm sure this has been mentioned before, but I'll throw it in for the sake of continuing discussion.


3. Don't be a Debbie Downer. It sucks having to wake up early for recording dates, and it sucks having to do load-out at 3am, but please keep it to yourself. No one needs to be reminded why things suck. It helps no one and only increases bad vibes.

Agree, with this especially. But I prefer 'Negative Nancy.'

 

[Joe Nerve]

Okay, so no one adding any new commentary? Remember, this aint a sticky anymore...

Why not?

 

[mambo4]

I've been mulling over my reactions to #484 (age matters) and #485(have offstage roles).

Age matters:
I'm 41 going on 42 , and most of my bandmates are no spring chickens, so the "age matters" argument does hit home. but I think this aspect depends heavily on what our own definitions of success are. Age matters if you goal is to "become that next U2, Beatles, Clash, whatever..." This level of success deopends on teens and pre teens buying your shwag and records, they want someone they identify with , who "gets" them, and they won't buy stuff from "some old guys". But in today's fragmented ,yet web connected market, you are free to lower your sights a little, and not exclude the possibility of making a buck. Become a houshold name among the youth of today? maybe not. But certainly age is not reason to throw in the towel and join a local cover band.

Offstage roles:
I agree that presenting a united face to the press is a helpful consideration. One of the ideas that recurs in my band, usualy when to comes to dwardrobe, is "we should all look like we're in the same band". I think appearing to the audiecne as a coherent unit is a good thing.

But going so far as saying explicitly who's the Paul and who's the Ringo seems like somehting you consider post-success, after people are paying attention. I can't see predefined 'public' roles as benefitting a band before that point. It seems a very minor condsideration in the face other obstacles to success.

 

[acedabone]

I've been mulling over my reactions to #484 (age matters) and #485(have offstage roles).

Age matters:
I'm 41 going on 42 , and most of my bandmates are no spring chickens, so the "age matters" argument does hit home. but I think this aspect depends heavily on what our own definitions of success are. Age matters if you goal is to "become that next U2, Beatles, Clash, whatever..." This level of success deopends on teens and pre teens buying your shwag and records, they want someone they identify with , who "gets" them, and they won't buy stuff from "some old guys". But in today's fragmented ,yet web connected market, you are free to lower your sights a little, and not exclude the possibility of making a buck. Become a houshold name among the youth of today? maybe not. But certainly age is not reason to throw in the towel and join a local cover band.

Offstage roles:
I agree that presenting a united face to the press is a helpful consideration. One of the ideas that recurs in my band, usualy when to comes to dwardrobe, is "we should all look like we're in the same band". I think appearing to the audiecne as a coherent unit is a good thing.

But going so far as saying explicitly who's the Paul and who's the Ringo seems like somehting you consider post-success, after people are paying attention. I can't see predefined 'public' roles as benefitting a band before that point. It seems a very minor condsideration in the face other obstacles to success.

+1

 

[Chuck King]

I'm 41 going on 42 , and most of my bandmates are no spring chickens, so the "age matters" argument does hit home. but I think this aspect depends heavily on what our own definitions of success are. * * * n today's fragmented ,yet web connected market, you are free to lower your sights a little, and not exclude the possibility of making a buck.

I'm also in my 40s and very conscious of the need to set reasonable and achievable goals, but, I've seen this sentiment a lot and I suspect that often redefining "success" to be less than what the average uninvolved person would consider "success" is a way to make oneself feel better in the face of not achieving success in the more general sense.

Anybody who has the drive to create original music, and then go through the substantial hardship necessary to put it out into the world on even a small level, must feel that he or she has something to communicate to the world, and that there is sufficient merit in what they are doing to make all that trouble worthwhile. I have a hard time believing that anybody with that drive is truly happy limiting the scope and reach of their art.

But it's a reality of the music marketplace that unless you were in the right place at the right time by your early 30s at the latest, you are astronomically unlikely to be able to put the pieces together that will be necessary to really connect with that wide audience. Again, that's nobody's fault---it's just the way the market and audience for music work. It's like, if you haven't reached six feet tall by the time you stop growing, you're astronomically unlikely to play pro basketball.

Everybody reaches an equilibrium point beyond which further banging of one's head against the wall in pursuit of success is not worth the trouble. And certainly, nowadays anybody can record an album in his or her basement and hawk it on line, and for the most part I think anybody who really wants to can find an outlet to perform. For those of us in our 40s, that equilibrium point is probably playing small local gigs and selling a handful of self-recorded CDs. Hey, I'm cool with that. But I don't think it's necessary or desirable to redefine "success" as an original musical venture down to that level.

 

[mambo4]

...
But it's a reality of the music marketplace that unless you were in the right place at the right time by your early 30s at the latest, you are astronomically unlikely to be able to put the pieces together that will be necessary to really connect with that wide audience. ...I don't think it's necessary or desirable to redefine "success" as an original musical venture down to that level.

'
I get where you're coming from, and I agree that some pragmatic humbling of our rock godhood dreams is in order. But I feel that the change in the music market over the last 2 decades makes the idea of what the average uninvolved person would consider success practically obsolete. It really is a different landscape than what we grew up with in the 80's, tho the archetypes of rock-stardom live on.

The potential market for bands that in the past would be "too old" for corporate backing has grown exponentially with the web. obviously broad, youth market, lowest common denominator appeal is less necessary because there are fewer gate keepers who must be convinced of our marketability.

It's the point made in [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

"The mass market is yielding to a million minimarkets. Hits will always be with us, but they have lost their monopoly. Blockbusters must now compete with an infinite number of niche offerings, which can be distributed just as easily. Justin Timberlake still makes albums, but today he has thousands of bands on MySpace as rivals. The hierarchy of attention has inverted – credibility now rises from below. MTV and Tower Records no longer decide who will win."

 

[iriegnome]

Is it really possible in today's market for an independent to "make it"?? It seems that without millions in backing or a "idol" type crap shoot, you can't make it into mainstream. However, depending on what you feel is "Being a Success" then traveling, touring and having your music support your music, then it is not really that difficult. Give 100%

 

[masterFlash]

I agree with the idea that the older you are, the more the chips are stacked against you. But I think it is more a matter of logistics than anything else. In order to be sucessful you have to market your brand\band\music like crazy. At 40yrs old its harder to play clubs every night and socialize with pub owners on off nights. In my 20s I went to see bands almost every night of the week, now I pick and chose 1 show every other week. Also I have 3 kids, hockey practices, soccer schedules, PTA, gutters that need fixing, early morning meetings etc. I am not in a position to do a 3 month van tour for little money. When I was younger I had tons of time. So I think in order to market your stuff as an older musician you have to think smarter. Forums, Bloggs, Emails, Networking sites; these can help you spread your influence. Hiring a PR person\team is great.