I've been wondering.........

[EXCAV8]

I got to thinking the other day about the sheer number of easy songs I know vs. difficult ones. The easy ones of course far exceed the difficult ones, although I would say it's through no fault of my own. I was just learning material the band wanted me to learn.

So what do you think? Is it better, or perhaps more marketable to know a lot of simpler songs, or to really hammer out those hard ones?

 

[Michedelic]

Depends on your market and what genres you work in, but as there are a billion 3 and 4 chord songs in so many different styles, I'd vote for that. Define or identify 'difficult'. If you are playing rock bar gigs, you are not playing "Close To The Edge" or equivalent, but you might play Steely Dan or some pop thing with a lot of jazz/lounge type changes.
Those would still be the exceptions.

 

[mrcbass]

@Michedelic pretty much said exactly what I would have. As with nearly everything, it depends, but the bigger your personal catalog, the more valuable you are.

I'm kind of like OP - pretty much learn what the band or audition needs (cover bar bands). Rarely do I learn something just because I want to (although I'm doing a little more of that during the Great Isolation to keep myself interested). I always appreciate it when some of those songs are a little challenging, but find that most are pretty simple and TRANSFERABLE to another opportunity. I'm getting to have a pretty decent catalog, which makes the next audition/jam that much easier. Have actually played songs live that I never rehearsed simply because I picked them up for an audition.

It is good to have a few "difficult" songs in your catalog, because those tend to force you to learn how to learn complex songs (different task than learning a good old fashioned 1-4-5), but the bigger your personal catalog, the better.